Satyendra Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17244 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2019 Thana- PARAIYA District- Gaya ====================================================== Satyendra Yadav, Gender Male, Aged about 32 years, Son of Chaneshar Yadav Resident of - Sikandarpur, P.S.- Paraiya, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Pritish Kumar Lal For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Uday Chand Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 15-10-2020 Heard Mr. Pritish Kumar Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, counsel for the State. In the present case, the petitioner is seeking bail in connection with Paraiya P.S. Case No. 133 of 2019 registered for offence under Sections 302, 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
In this case, specific allegation has been by the Informant against the petitioner to be involved in hanging her husband. The Informant, in her Ferdbeyan, has stated that she and her husband Siya Saran Yadav were irrigating the field through Motor pump. After switch on the motor, they came back to the house at 7 PM and, again at 9 PM, her husband went to watch the motor pump. After sometime, the Informant also followed and came at the motor pump. As per allegation, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17244 of 2020(6) dt.15-10-2020 2/2 Informant heard the throttling sound of her husband, whereafter, she ran towards the sound and saw that six persons including the petitioner were dragging her husband wrapping his neck by Gamchha and trying to kill him. She tried to save her husband but, failed.
Earlier this Court had called for the case diary and perused the same.
Looking to the nature of allegation and the fact that the Informant herself is claiming to be the eye-witness of the occurrence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner, above named, is rejected with a direction to the court below to conclude the trial expeditiously preferably within a period of nine months after the restoration of normal court proceedings. (Shivaji Pandey, J) rishi/- U T