Santosh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12085 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-88 Year-2018 Thana- KASMA District- Aurangabad ====================================================== SANTOSH YADAV Son of Ganauri Yadav Resident of village -Bhatkurha, P.S.-Kasma, District-Aurangabad .. ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rupa Kumari For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nand Kishore Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 27-06-2019 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Kasma Police Station Case No. 88 of 2018, disclosing offences under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation against the petitioner is that the husband of the informant, Suresh Singh (deceased), used to frequently visit the house of Kuldeep Ravidas, where the petitioner also used to come. It has further been alleged that some money was taken by Kuldeep Ravidas and the petitioner from the husband of the informant and when the husband of the informant demanded the money back, both the persons had abused the husband of the informant and had also threatened to eliminate him. On the date of occurrence, i.e. on 19.10.2018, the husband of the informant had left his house for attending his duty at Sindri and on 21.10.2018, the informant received

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12085 of 2019(4) dt.27-06-2019 2/2 information that one dead body was found near village Oriyachak and when the informant reached there, she saw that the dead body was of her husband. In the First Information Report, the informant has expressed strong suspicion against Kuldeep Ravidas and this petitioner in the killing of her husband Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of this petitioner has come in the First Information Report merely on suspicion and there is no eye-witness to the occurrence.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, referring to post-mortem examination in the case diary, has submitted that the deceased died of brain haemmorhage due to external injuries in his neck and head.

After having heard learned Counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the petitioner is named in the First Information Report and a strong suspicion has been raised by the informant, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail tot he petitioner.

Accordingly, this application for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected.

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