Chandradeep Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29919 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2021 Thana- ANTI District- Gaya ====================================================== Chandradeep Yadav son of Krishna Yadav R/o Village- Itwan, P.S.- Konch, Dist.- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Brijmohan Das, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 03-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Aanti P.S. Case No. 07 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Allegedly, the petitioner along with his associates committed murder of the informant's son.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and he has committed no offence. No such occurrence as alleged has ever taken place. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is totally false and based on concocted facts. He was not named in the FIR as the FIR was lodged against 3-4 unknown persons.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29919 of 2024(2) dt.03-07-2024 2/2 There is nothing on record against the petitioner. He has been made accused in the present case merely on the basis of C.D.R. and location of mobile. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that in police statement, co-accused Uday Yadav disclosed the name of the petitioner to be involved in murder of the deceased, which is also evident from the impugned order. Hence, he does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case as well as the nature of offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

7. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seeks regular bail, the learned Court below shall pass order on the same day in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) divyanshi/- U T