Raj Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77525 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-371 Year-2022 Thana- SIMRI BAKHTIYARPUR DistrictSaharsa ====================================================== Raj Kumar Yadav S/O Nanku Yadav Village- Mahkhar, Ward No. 11, Ps. Bakhtiyarpur, Dist. Saharsa ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr. Advocate Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Amitesh Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 07-03-2024

1. Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with S.Tr. no. 243 of 2023 arising out of Baktiyarpur P.S. Case no. 371 of 2022 registered under sections 302, 307, 506, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 25(1-B)a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that Raj Kumar Yadav i.e. the petitioner herein and Banti Sharma resorted to firing. The shot fired by Banti Sharma hit the informant's husband in his stomach while the shot fired by the petitioner in his chest. He further stated that Nanku Yadav fired three shots on the chest of the husband of the informant and one

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77525 of 2023(3) dt.07-03-2024 2/3 shot in his head as a result of which he died.

4. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case which would be evident from the contents of the F.I.R itself insofar as the informant does not appear to be an eyewitness. Further referring to the F.I.R it is submitted that while the occurrence alleged is said to have taken place at 8:00 p.m. on 20.8.2022, inspite of the police station being at a distance of only 6 kms., information as per the F.I.R was given at the police station only at 1:25 p.m. the next day on 21.8.2022. However surprisingly even before information having been given at the police station, the seizure list was prepared at 7:15 a.m. itself on 21.8.2022. It is thus submitted that after completion of the investigation, as an after thought, a false and incorrect F.I.

R has been registered narrating a fictitious story and making false allegation against this petitioner and also others including the co-accused Banti Sharma. The said Banti Sharma has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 30.8.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. no. 37871 of 2023. The petitioner is in custody since 23.9.2022 and charge has been framed in the learned trial Court. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77525 of 2023(3) dt.07-03-2024 3/3

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner of having fired at the husband of the informant hitting him in the chest as a result of which the petitioner died, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

7. Taking into consideration the submissions made and the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same within a period of 6 months.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Harsh/- U T