Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court - Orders

Yadav Ji @ Dharmendra Yadav vs The State Of Bihar on 3 October, 2013

Author: Rakesh Kumar

Bench: Rakesh Kumar

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                Criminal Miscellaneous No. 29448 of 2013
                  ==================================================
                  Yadav Ji @ Dharmendra Yadav son of Late Achhe Lal Yadav,
                  resident of village- Oriyara, P.S. - Dhanarua, District- Patna.
                                                                    .... .... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                  The State of Bihar
                                                               .... .... Opposite Party/s
                  ==================================================
                  Appearance :
                  For the Petitioner/s          :    Mr.
                  For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr.
                  ==================================================
                  CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR
                  ORAL ORDER

3.   03-10-2013

Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Singh-I, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

The petitioner, who is in custody in Dhanarua P.S. Case No. 345 of 2012 registered for the offence under Sections 342, 302 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code, has prayed for grant of bail.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. Moreover, specific allegation was made against one another accused person.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer of the petitioner. He submits that the 2 Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29448 of 2013 (3) dt.03-10-2013 2/2 informant (Dharmshila Devi, widow of deceased) in the F.I.R. has categorically made statement that telephonically, she received information regarding the occurrence and name of the petitioner and others were disclosed, which was subsequently corroborated during investigation. The petitioner is having criminal antecedent. He is accused in at least three serious cases, besides the present case.

In view of the facts and circumstances, the prayer for bail stands rejected.

(Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay