Patna High CourtCR. MISC./3792/2020bail rejected

Pinku @ Rajesh Ranjan @ Pinku Yadav @ Pinku Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2020-06-05Mr. Justice Shivaji Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3792 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-135 Year-2019 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura ====================================================== Pinku @ Rajesh Ranjan @ Pinku Yadav @ Pinku Kumar S/o Raghunandan Prasad Yadav @ Raghunandan Yadav R/o village- Bhelahi, P.S.- Murliganj, District- Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Yogendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mrs. Gulnar Begum, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Amar Nath Jha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 05-06-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Informant through Virtual Court proceeding.

In the present case, the petitioner is seeking bail in connection with Murliganj P.S. Case No. 135 of 2019 (S.T.No. 235/19), registered for the offence punishable under Sections 364, 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation has been made that when the informant and others including the deceased had gone to visit Bishurawat fair then co-accused Amit Kumar and Pinku Yadav (petitioner) started abusing, assaulted and took the deceased forcibly by Bolero vehicle and on the next day, dead body of Nirmal Kumar Yadav (deceased) was found in the river.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3792 of 2020(4) dt.05-06-2020 2/2 Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner of killing the deceased and merely on the basis of suspicion, he has been implicated in the present case, but from paragraphs 2, 6, 14, 31 and 38 of the case diary indicate the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of the crime inasmuch as he has criminal history. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected for the present.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) V.K.Pandey/- U T