Munchun Yadav @ Rakesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37664 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2020 Thana- KHAGAUL District- Patna ====================================================== MUNCHUN YADAV @ RAKESH KUMAR Son of Late Jatadhari Yadav @ Ganguli Rai Resident of Village - Babu Chak, P.S.- Phulwarisharif, Distt.- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Y. C. Verma, Sr. Adv.

Mr.Sanjeev Ranjan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 06-04-2022 Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 234 of 2021, arising out of Khagaul Police Station Case No. 83 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that the brother of the informant was found dead near his hutment and a suspicion has been raised in the First Information Report against the petitioner that about two days back, there was a quarrel between the petitioner and the deceased on the point of payment of some amount and the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37664 of 2021(3) dt.06-04-2022 2/3 petitioner had threatened the deceased of dire consequence. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that except the suspicion raised against the petitioner in the First Information Report, there is no other material to connect him with the present offence. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 30.12.2020 and charge sheet has been submitted against him and as such there is no likelihood that the petitioner will abscond and/or tamper with the evidence. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner has criminal antecedents of similar nature of offence and the statement made in the First Information Report has been corroborated by the independent witnesses that the petitioner had threatened the deceased about two days back in relation to the dispute regarding payment of some amount.

Regards being had to the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner, at this stage.

This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after six months from today, if the trial does not show any

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37664 of 2021(3) dt.06-04-2022 3/3 progress.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √