IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.28253 of 2008 NARESH YADAV @ NARESH PRASAD Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 29.08.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is an accused in a case registered for the offences under Sections 307, 324/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the allegation is to the effect that he also fired with his rifle which hit the daughter of the informant on her hand and abdomen, however in the hospital the informant has stated that his daughter got injured on account of the firing made by one Tuntun Yadav. Learned Addl. P.P., on the other hand, submits that the allegations are very clear to the effect that the petitioner fired with his rifle, however, the informant has further stated that it was the firing made by Tuntun Yadav which hit his daughter. Therefore, taking into consideration the fact that petitioner had also made firing which hit, at this stage, the petitioner is not entitled to be granted anticipatory bail. Considering the above, and in the light of the - 2 - allegations levelled against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant him the privilege of anticipatory bail. His prayer for grant of anticipatory bail is, accordingly, rejected. It is, however, made clear that in case on surrender the petitioner makes an application for grant of bail before the Court below, the same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by the present order. Manish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)