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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36388 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-156 Year-2018 Thana- PANDAUL District- Madhubani ====================================================== MUNNA KUMAR YADAV @ MUNNA YADAV, aged about 20 years (Male), Son of Sajjan Yadav @ Sajan Kumar Yadav, Resident of VillageFatehpur, Belahi, P.S.- Belahi, District- Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr.Arjun Prasad, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-03-2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defects, as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence under Sections 302 and 201/34 of the I.P.C. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the husband of the informant had gone in the evening to attend the party with his friends on a Ranger Cycle but he did not return in the night. In the morning, the informant came to know that a dead body was lying at the pond and when she went there, identified the dead body of her husband, Ranger Cycle was also lying by side. This is second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36388 of 2020(3) dt.03-03-2021 2/2 Earlier bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide Cr. Misc. No. 12614 of 2019 under order dated 19.07.2019 by a Bench of this Court, annexed as Annexure-1 to the present bail application, taking into account that on the confession of the petitioner, broken piece of bottle of wine as well as blood stained broken bottle which was used for committing murder of the deceased was recovered from the place of occurrence. A report was called for from the court below regarding the present stage of the case. It has been reported that thirteen prosecution witnesses have been examined and two prosecution witnesses are left to be examined. Considering the nature of accusation and the stage of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No. 156 of 2018, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Madhubani.

The court below is directed to take all necessary steps to conclude the trial preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. (Sudhir Singh, J) U.K./- U T