Manoj Kumar Yadav @ Manoj Yadav @ Manoj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10073 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2022 Thana- DHORAIYA District- Banka ====================================================== 1.

Manoj Kumar Yadav @ Manoj Yadav @ Manoj Kumar ,Son of Sudin Yadav @ Surendra Prasad Yadav Resident of Village -Tahirpur, P.S.-Dhoraiya, District.-Banka 2.

Manita Devi @ Namita Devi Wife of Manoj Kumar Yadav @ Manoj Yadav @ Manoj Kumar Resident of Village -Tahirpur, P.S.-Dhoraiya, District.- Banka ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Brij Nandan Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 19-04-2024

1. Heard the parties.

2. Petitioners seek regular bail in connection with Dhoraiya P.S. Case No. 51 of 2022 dated 06.02.2022 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 302, 201 and 120B of Indian Penal Code.

3. Mr. Brij Nandan Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners earlier preferred Cr. Misc. No. 40012 of 2022 for the relief of regular bail which was rejected by this court vide order dated 24.11.2022 with giving a liberty to the petitioners to renew their bail prayer after one year, if their trial is not concluded in the said period and now the petitioners have again come before this court for the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10073 of 2024(3) dt.19-04-2024 2/2 relief of bail mainly on the ground of their long incarceration period and no progress in their trial. It is further submitted that both the petitioners have been languishing in jail since 28.03.2022 and their trial has commenced and the charges were framed on 03.02.2024 but thereafter no progress has been made in their trial.

4. Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman, learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the bail prayer of the petitioner.

5. Considering the above submissions and mainly taking into account the incarceration period of the petitioners and also, the fact, that the trial of the petitioners has commenced and charges have been framed upon them but thereafter there is no progress in their trial which is at initial stage, in my opinion, now the petitioners deserve to be released on bail. Accordingly, let the petitioners named-above be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court in connection with Dhoraiya P.S. Case No. 51 of 2022.

(Shailendra Singh, J) Rajiv/- U T