Sunil Kumar Yadav @ Sunil Yadav @ Sunil Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31266 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-278 Year-2018 Thana- MANJHI District- Saran ====================================================== Sunil Kumar Yadav @ Sunil Yadav @ Sunil Kumar S/O Rangila Yadav R/O Village- Gobarahi, P.S- Daudpur, Distt.- Saran. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Ms. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Rina Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 21-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Rina Sinha, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The case of the prosecution is that while the husband of the informant was sleeping, the accused persons entered in her house. All were armed with weapon. It is further alleged that the petitioner and along with Anjani Yadav and others Ramashish Yadav caught hold of her husband and Sushil Yadav fired at him due to which he died.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from perusal of the FIR itself it is clear that the deceased was sleeping. The allegation against this petitioner is that he along with Anjani Yadav and Ramashish Yadav caught hold of hand and leg of the deceased. Thereupon Sushil Yadav made fire. It has been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31266 of 2025(2) dt.21-05-2025 2/2 submitted by the learned counsel that from perusal of the FIR it appears improbable that why two persons will caught hold of a sleeping man. The learned counsel further submits that during investigation the witnesses have stated that they went to the house of informant after hulla. Only eye-witness in this case is the informant who is wife of the deceased. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. He is in judicial custody since 24.12.2024.

5. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with Manjhi P.S. Case No. 278 of 2018 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-XI, Saran at Chapra.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Durgesh/- U T