Disposed

Shambhu Yadav v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC10 Dec 2021CR. MISC./24959/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought regular bail in an FIR involving firing from a pistol causing injuries under IPC Section 307 and Arms Act. Rejecting the plea of false implication and noting grievous injuries on the informant, the Hon'ble Court refused bail and directed the trial court to expedite proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's bail application rejected; trial court directed to expedite trial; liberty to renew bail prayer after six months.

Shambhu Yadav Vs the State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24959 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2020 Thana- BAKHTIYARPUR District- Patna

¶3

======================================================

¶4

SHAMBHU YADAV S/O AWADHESH YADAV R/O VILLAGE-MISI, P.S.BAKHTIYARPUR, DISTRICT-PATNA.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 10-12-2021

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing.

¶13

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under section 307 and other sections of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶14

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is stated to have fired from pistol on the informant Harikant Kumar causing firearm injuries in his head.

¶15

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The alleged injuries have been found to be simple in nature. The petitioner is in custody since 14.9.2020 and chargesheet has been submitted in the case. He undertakes to cooperate in the

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24959 of 2021(3) dt.10-12-2021 2/2

¶17

trial.

¶18

Heard learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶19

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the materials on record, it transpires that the allegation of firing against the petitioner is confirmed from the injury report of the informant wherein grievous injuries have been found on the forehead of the informant. As such, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

¶20

Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial.

¶21

Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after six months, if there is no progress in the trial in the learned court below.

¶22

(Partha Sarthy, J)

¶23

Saurabh/-

¶24

U T

Shambhu Yadav v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shambhu Yadav v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aslam Khan Vs The State of Bihar

Krishna Mohan Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Umesh Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Rohit Kumar Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Arun Sahani Vs the State of Bihar

Md. Faryad Vs the State of Bihar