Himanchal Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.48637 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -30 Year- 2017 Thana -GOBARDHANA DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ====================================================== Himanchal Yadav son of Thakur Yadav resident of Village - Laxmipur, Kauha, P.S. - Sirisiya, District - West Champaran, at present Vill. Chamardiha Bagdav, Khalwatola, P.S.

Gobardhana, Distt.

West Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 09-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

Petitioner prays for bail in connection with Gowardhan P.S.Case No. 30 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 307, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Allegation as per FIR is that one motorcyclist opened fire which hit on the neck of husband of the informant and later on injured has named this petitioner also and stated that the person, who was talking with the petitioner, has fired at him. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is not named and only on the basis of suspicion he has been made accused because of the fact that earlier he had given

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48637 of 2018 (4) dt.09-10-2018 2/2 threat to him and he is in custody since 23.4.2018. Heard learned APP and learned counsel for the informant. They have opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that there was illicit relationship with daughter of informant and the petitioner, on which husband of informant protested as such he was shot fire at the instance of the petitioner. Having heard both sides and in the facts and circumstances, as stated above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

However, as the petitioner is in custody, let the trial be expedited.

With the above observation, this application is dismissed. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U T