IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.15718 of 2009 1. BABLU YADAV 2. LALLAN YADAV 3. BINOD YADAV Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4. . 12.08.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioners, counsel for the informant and counsel for the State. The petitioners who are three in number, pray for grant of bail in a case instituted under diverse sections of the Penal Code including section 302 IPC. as well as section 27 of the Arms Act. As per allegations in the FIR, while the deceased was sitting in a saloon for shaving, the accused persons named therein surrounded him from outside the saloon and thereafter it is alleged that co-accused Guddu Yadav assaulted him by means of fire-arms (carbine) which hit him close to his chin. Thereafter the allegation is that petitioner no.2 Lallan Yadav fired from his weapon which hit him in chest. The deceased fell down and started yelling. On his turn, petitioner no.3 Binod Yadav fired which hit below the right eye of the deceased. It is alleged that thereafter petitioned no.1 fired from his pistol which hit the left thigh of the deceased. Further allegation is that co-accused Sanjeev also fired which hit the right thigh of the deceased. Injured succumbed to these injuries then and there. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the post- mortem report does not support the prosecution case in toto. It is contended that co-accused Sanjeev Yadav having somewhat identical allegation, has since been granted bail by this court. He handed in a copy 2 of the order dated 24.06.2009, passed in Cr.Misc.No.13372 of 2009 which is placed on record marked ‘X’. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant states that the petitioners herein have criminal antecedents and there is/are direct allegation(s) against them. He handed in a copy of the order dated 19.02.2009, passed in Cr.Misc. No.5681 of 2009 and submitted that co- accuseds Umesh Yadav and Hare Ram Yadav who carry somewhat general allegation have been refused bail on merit by this Court. A copy of the said order is placed on record marked ‘Y’. It is contended that the deceased received as many as five fire-arms injuries on his person which correlate and support the allegations contained in the FIR. Having regard to the submissions advanced at the Bar and after going through materials on record including orders at ‘X’ & ‘Y’, this Court takes a view that the allegations contained in the FIR and the materials on record would not justify release of the petitioners on bail. The application is, accordingly dismissed. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )