Back
HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Mr. Justice Mohit Kumar Shah
TUFANA YADAV @ RAMESH YADAV – Appellant
Versus
The State – Respondent
CR. MISC./38025/2022
The court will not grant bail to an accused if there are ample materials on record to show his complicity in the alleged crime.
Headnote:
BAIL - SECTION 302 IPC - REGULAR BAIL - DENIED - COMPLICITY OF THE PETITIONER IN THE ALLEGED CRIME - FACTUM OF THE PETITIONER HAVING FIRED GUN-SHOTS ON THE HUSBAND OF THE INFORMANT AND HIM SUSTAINING GUN-SHOT INJURIES LEADING TO HIS DEATH STANDS SUBSTANTIATED
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Gopalpur (Rangra) P.S. Case No. 105 of 2019 for the offence registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 342, 302 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the informant along with her husband had gone to the field to cut the grown-up grass of the maize crop and while they were returning, the accused persons including the petitioner herein had surrounded the husband of the informant and as far as the petitioner is concerned, he had fired gun-shots on the husband of the informant, resulting in him being hit by a bullet, whereupon he had fallen on the ground and then the other accused persons had also fired gun-shots.
Finding of the Court:
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into account the materials available in the case diary, this Court finds that there are ample materials on record to show the complicity of the petitioner in the alleged crime, apart from the fact that the factum of the petitioner having fired gun-shots on the husband of the informant and him sustaining gun-shot injuries leading to his death stands substantiated, hence, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, thus, the present petition stands dismissed.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail in the present case?
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that there were ample materials on record to show the complicity of the petitioner in the alleged crime, apart from the fact that the factum of the petitioner having fired gun-shots on the husband of the informant and him sustaining gun-shot injuries leading to his death stands substantiated.
Final Decision: The petition for regular bail was dismissed.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38025 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-105 Year-2019 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
TUFANA YADAV @ RAMESH YADAV SON OF NIGAR YADAV R/O
VILLAGE- CHAPAR, P.S.- GOPALPUR (RANGRA), DISTT.-
BHAGALPUR
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr.Ashok Kumar Yadav, Advocate
:
Mr.Bhola Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
ORAL ORDER
5
11-01-2023
Heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks regular bail in
connection with Gopalpur (Rangra) P.S. Case No.
105 of 2019 for the offence registered under
Sections 147, 148, 149, 342, 302 and 120B of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
The case of the prosecution, in brief, is
that the informant alongwith her husband, namely,
Bitan Yadav had gone to the field on 14.04.2019 at
about 6:00 A.M., to cut the grown up grass of the
maize crop and while they were returning, the
accused persons including the petitioner herein
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38025 of 2022(5) dt.11-01-2023
2/3
had surrounded the husband of the informant and
as far as the petitioner is concerned, he had fired
gun-shots on the husband of the informant,
resulting in him being hit by a bullet, whereupon
he had fallen on the ground and then the other
accused persons had also fired gun-shots.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that the petitioner is innocent, he has
been falsely implicated in the present case and he
is languishing in custody since 19.07.2021. The
learned counsel for the petitioner has further
submitted that though the petitioner is an accused
in two other criminal cases but he is on bail in one
of them. It is also submitted that the incident of
firing of gun-shots on the husband of the informant
by the petitioner is not supported by the post-
mortem report.
Per contra, the learned A.P.P. for the State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
Having regard to the facts and
circumstances of the case, considering the
submissions made by the learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38025 of 2022(5) dt.11-01-2023
3/3
petitioner and taking into account the materials
available in the case diary, this Court finds that
there are ample materials on record to show the
complicity of the petitioner in the alleged crime,
apart from the fact that the factum of the
petitioner having fired gun-shots on the husband of
the informant and him sustaining gun-shot injuries
leading to his death stands substantiated, hence, I
am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, thus,
the present petition stands dismissed.
S.Sb/Saurav
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
U
T
