Shivam Yadav @ Shivam Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10644 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2019 Thana- LODIPUR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== SHIVAM YADAV @ SHIVAM KUMAR Son of Murari Yadav Resident of Village - Kodha (Korha), P.S.- Lodipur, District - Bhagalpur. ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Indeshwari Prasad Mandal For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Bal Mukund Prasad Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 28-09-2020 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, through video conferencing.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Lodipur Police Station Case No. 102 of 2019, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/201/120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner, along with other co-accused persons, killed the brother of the informant by pressing his neck. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged and he has falsely been implicated in this case merely on the basis of suspicion. He further submits that in fact all other coaccused persons have been granted anticipatory bail except two persons, who were granted regular bail.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10644 of 2020(5) dt.28-09-2020 2/2 On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that some of the accused persons have been granted bail and some of them are absconding. He, referring to paragraphs 19 and 24 of the case diary, submits that the petitioner, along with his brothers, Jaky Yadav, Binod Yadav and Subodh Yadav, have killed the brother of the informant by strangulating him. He further submits that there was dispute between brother of the informant and the accused persons inasmuch as a piece of land was purchased by the deceased from the mother of co-accused Gaurav and the mother of coaccused Gaurav, this petitioner along with other co-accused persons are related. He further submits that the brother of the petitioner, Jaky Yadav, who is similarly situated, has been granted regular bail by this Court, as such, the petitioner does not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail.

Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the materials on record, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail. This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √