Guddu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10045 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2022 Thana- BAGENGOLA District- Buxar ====================================================== GUDDU YADAV Son of Ashok Yadav R/v- Konhi, P.S.- Murar, DistrictBuxar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ravindra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 06-06-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bagen Gola P.S. Case No. 82 of 2022, lodged on 20.08.2022 under Sections 364, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the case has been lodged against three named accused persons including the present petitioner on the basis of suspicion as mentioned in the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is nothing specific alleged against the petitioner in the FIR, save and except, suspicion is there. He further submits that the antecedent of the petitioner is clean and he is in custody since 26.08.2022. Moreover, the chargesheet has already been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10045 of 2023(4) dt.06-06-2023 2/2 submitted in this case.
5. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that it is a case of pure circumstantial evidence in nature and in the case diary witnesses have seen the petitioner along with the deceased and, thereafter, the dead body was recovered.
6. Since it is a case of strong suspicion and appears to be based on circumstantial evidence, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner in connection with Bagen Gola P.S. Case No. 82 of 2022, pending before the learned CJM, Buxar is hereby rejected.
8. However, the trial Court is directed to concluded the trial within nine months.
(Dr. Anshuman, J) Ashwini/- U