Bangali Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84825 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2024 Thana- SAHEBPUR KAMAL DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== Bangali Yadav S/O Late Chulho Yadav R/O Vill.- Khand Diyara,P.SSahebpur Kamal,Dist- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Sunil Kumar Yadav, Advocate Mr. Prabhat Kumar, Advocate Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 07-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 168 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 341, 386, 302, 379, 120(B), 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3.The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the petitioner, along with others being armed with weapons, was demanding five lakh rupees as rangdari, failing which they would not allow the informant to collect the fishes. It is further alleged that the petitioner fired with his three nuts at Gopal Sahni, who was declared dead by the hospital.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84825 of 2025(3) dt.07-04-2026 2/2 has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that actually the dispute was with one Gopal Sahni. There was no dispute with the petitioner from the informant, whereas the allegation is against the petitioner for firing at Gopal Sahni, due to which he died. He also submits that Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 25.02.2025.

5. The application for bail is vehemently opposed by learned APP for the State and submits that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of firing. He also submits that from perusal of the postmortem report, it is clear that the deceased has received one wound of entry and one wound of exit.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage, however the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after six months if the trial is not concluded.

7. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U T