Mantu Yadav @ Mantu Kumar Yadve v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19431 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2022 Thana- MAIN P.S. District- Gaya ====================================================== Mantu Yadav @ Mantu Kumar Yadve S/o- Jagnarayan Yadav @ Jagnarayan Singh village- suraundha Ps- Main Dist- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rakesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 01-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and perused the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sessions Trial Case No. 284 of 2023 arising out of Main P.S. case No. 89 of 2022 instituted for the offences under Sections 302, 201, 304B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that the petitioner alongwith the family members tortured and killed the deceased for the non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19431 of 2024(3) dt.01-05-2024 2/3 petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is the husband of the deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that general and omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner. No specific overt act is alleged against the petitioner. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 24.09.2022 and has no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. On perusal of the record it appears that earlier, the report regarding the stage of the trial was called for and the same has been received and kept at Flag-A. On perusal of the said report, it appears that charge has been framed against the petitioner and learned APP has undertaken to produce prosecution witnesses within six months.
7. Having considered the submissions canvassed by the learned counsel for the parties and the material placed on record, the petitioner being husband of the deceased as well as considering the present stage of the trial, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
8. However, if the prosecution witnesses are not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19431 of 2024(3) dt.01-05-2024 3/3 examined within nine months from the date of receipt/production of this order, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail.
9. Prayer is rejected with the aforesaid observations. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T