Anjay Yadav @ Anjay Kumar Yadav @ Anjay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82374 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-724 Year-2023 Thana- KHAGARIA District- Khagaria ====================================================== Anjay Yadav @ Anjay Kumar Yadav @ Anjay Kumar S/O- Late Ramashish Yadav, R/o- Village- Badi Kothiya, W. No- 2, PS- Khagaria (Muffasil), DistKhagaria. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party :

Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-12-2024 Heard Mr. Pankaj Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2.

Petitioner seeks regular bail who is in custody since 21.08.2023, in connection with Khagaria (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 724 of 2023, FIR dated 18.07.2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 307 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of Arms Act.

3.

Earlier the petitioner has moved before this Hon'ble Court in Cr. Misc. No. 29627 of 2024, which was rejected vide order dated 05.07.2024.

4.

According to the prosecution case, the FIR named co-accused persons under a conspiracy and with an intention to kill, fired upon the informant and the bullet hit in the neck of informant.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82374 of 2024(2) dt.03-12-2024 2/2 5.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that from the records, it appears that the bail petition of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 05.07.2024 and within short span of three months, petitioner has again moved before this Hon'ble Court without assigning any fresh ground for filing the present bail petition. He further submits that no fresh ground is made out in the present bail petition. 6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it appears that bail prayer of the petitioner had earlier been rejected vide order dated 05.07.2024, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 29627 of 2024 and petitioner has again moved before this Hon'ble Court in the present bail petition without assigning any fresh ground. 7.

No fresh ground is made out in the present bail petition.

8.

Accordingly, the present bail petition stands dismissed.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Shahnawaz/- U T