IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.13080 of 2011 Manohar Yadav @ Abhimanu Yadav Versus The State Of Bihar ----------- 03/ 08.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant. Petitioner is named in the first information report with specific allegation that he opened fire causing fire arms injury on the back of the informant. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that according to the prosecution case itself alleged occurrence took place on 15.4.2010 but fardbeyan of the informant was recorded on 18.4.2010, particularly, in the circumstance when after alleged occurrence family members of the informant reached at the place of the occurrence. It is also contended by him that the informant was referred to Bhagalpur but it is not clear as to why he was taken to Patna where he was admitted in a private clinic. It is also contended by him that the injury report has been prepared by doctor of a private clinic and moreover, though doctor has opined that injury, found on the person of the informant, was grievous in nature but the doctor has not stated that the aforesaid injury was danger to life of the informant. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, particularly, keeping in mind that the petitioner is the main assailant and the injury report corroborates the allegation, I do not feel it proper to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail in connection with Kharagpur P.S. Case no. 106/2010 pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger stands rejected. shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J)