Krishna Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.545 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-241 Year-2018 Thana- BAHADURPUR District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Krishna Kumar Yadav Son of Ram Pramod Yadav @Pramod Yadav Resident of Village- Pidori Kamalpur, P.S.- Bahadurpur, District- Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Sanjay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 28-03-2019 This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Bahadurpur P.S. Case No. 241 of 2018, disclosing offences under Sections 302, 328, 120(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation as per F.I.R. is that the informant's husband gave Rs.25,000/- to the father of the petitioner to pursue the litigation, but he has not pursued the same and also not returning the money and as such husband of the informant asked him to return the money which was avoided by the father of the petitioner on one pretext or another and thereafter it is also alleged that on 03.06.2018 left his house to meet the Superintendent of Police and in the intervening night at about 2:25 A.M. the husband of the informant was brought home by Ram Sewak Mandal and disclosed his wife that Pramod Yadav, his wife and his son i.e. the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.545 of 2019(4) dt.28-03-2019 2/2 forcibly administered poison to him and left him on the road. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that though it is alleged that the husband of the informant had disclosed the name of the petitioner and other accused persons who administered poison to him, but that is not supported by Ram Sewak Mandal and moreover father of the petitioner has taken money from the husband of the informant and the petitioner is a student and he has falsely been implicated in this case. Heard learned A.P.P. as well as learned counsel for the informant, they have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner stating that the name of the petitioner was also disclosed by the deceased.

Having heard both sides, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, rather he should surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks and make prayer for regular bail, which will be considered on its own merit, without being prejudice by order of this Court.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Amjad/- U T