Patna High CourtCR. MISC./10805/2024bail rejected

Suresh Yadav @ Suresh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-05-13Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10805 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-354 Year-2023 Thana- RAJAOLI District- Nawada ====================================================== Suresh Yadav @ Suresh Kumar S/O- Damodar Yadav R/O- VillageGhasakotand, P.S.- Gadhi, Dist.- Jamui (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Krishna Deo Raj For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Umanath Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 13-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Rajaoli P.S. Case No. 354 of 2023 instituted for the offences under Section 365 of the Indian Penal Code and later on added Sections 364, 302, 201 and 120B of the IPC.

3. As per prosecution case, the accusation against the accused persons including the petitioner is of being involved in the alleged kidnapping of the husband of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. There has been delay in lodging the FIR. Except confession, no consistent evidence has come against the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10805 of 2024(4) dt.13-05-2024 2/2 petitioner to show his complicity in the alleged occurrence. The petitioner is in custody since 27.06.2023 and has no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the application for bail and submitted that petitioner is named in the FIR. There is specific overt act of killing the deceased is against the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner confessed his guilt that in which manner he committed murder of the deceased, which has come in para-37 of the case diary, which corroborates the prosecution case. During investigation several witnesses have also supported the prosecution case.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the seriousness of the case, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

7. The trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Arish/- U T