Chandrika Yadav @ Chandar Yadav And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.69551 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-178 Year-2017 Thana- NAWADA District- Nawada ======================================================

1. Chandrika Yadav @ Chandar Yadav Son of Late Mohan Yadav,

2. Sandip Kumar, Son of Chandrika Yadav,

3. Munnilal Yadav @ Ranjit Kumar, Son of Chandrika Yadav, All residents of Villlage Mayor Bigha, P.S.- Nawada, District- Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar -2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 19-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for informant. The petitioners seek bail in Nawada P. S. Case No. 178 of 2017 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 147, 148, 149, 325, 307, 384 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act.

In the written report, it is alleged that petitioner no.1 assaulted the informant with Garasa on the head. It is further alleged that co-accused Rajesh Yadav also assaulted the informant with sword on his head and other parts of the body. It is further alleged that petitioner no.2 assaulted Rajan Kumar on his chest with Garasa and petitioner no.3 caused injury with sword to Rajesh Yadav on head.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.69551 of 2018(8) dt.19-02-2019 2/2 Learned counsel for informant has appeared and opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that all the three persons have sustained grievous injury. Two injured(s) have sustained amputated thumb injury which is mentioned in the injury report. Learned counsel further submits that doctor has found grievous injury on the head of the informant. It is further submitted that informant has given letter to the Officer-in-charge Nawada, stating that accused persons are giving threat to him of dire consequence.

Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners at this stage. The prayer for bail of the petitioners stands rejected.

Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. Petitioners may renew their prayer for bail after six months if no substantial progress is made in the trial. (Sanjay Priya, J) shyambihari/- U T