Subhash Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27538 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-139 Year-2023 Thana- CHAKAI District- Jamui ====================================================== Subhash Yadav Son Of Late Sadhu Yadav Resident Of Village- Makarkand @ Makarken, Ps- Charka Paththar, Dist- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dinkar Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-06-2024 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 16.10.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 66707 of 2023.

3. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered for the offence under Sections 302, 201, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The following order was passed on 16.10.2023 in Cr. Misc. No. 66707 of 2023:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Suman Kumari Singh learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 13.05.2023 in connection with Chakai P.S. Case No. 139/2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302/201/120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, two

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27538 of 2024(2) dt.21-06-2024 2/2 persons have been killed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of suspicion. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there is no eye-witness to the occurrence. He further submits the petitioner has no concern with the co-accused Pankaj Yadav.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that materials have come during investigation to connect the petitioner with the killing in this case of double murder.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the nature of allegations, I am not inclined to grant him bail. It is, accordingly, rejected.

6.The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

5. No ground for review is made out.

6. Accordingly, this application for regular bail is hereby rejected.

7. The court below is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Shishir/- U T