Santosh Kumar Yadav @ Santosh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33979 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2020 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Gaya ====================================================== Santosh Kumar Yadav @ Santosh Kumar Son Of Late Sakendra Yadav R/O Village- Biri Rampur, P.S.- Fatehpur, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ajay Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Uday Chand Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-10-2022 Heard both parties.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Fatehpur PS Case No. 142 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the prosecution case, petitioner along with other co-accused persons committed murder of Sakendra Yadav. It is submitted that only on suspicion petitioner has been made accused in this case. Petitioner is non-else than own son of the deceased Sakendra Yadav. Informant is not eyewitness of the occurrence. During course of investigation, none of the witnesses has claimed to have seen this petitioner committing the murder.
However, counsel for State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that during course of investigation it has come that on the alleged date and time of occurrence,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33979 of 2022(2) dt.20-10-2022 2/2 the deceased assaulted his wife upon which, this petitioner hit the deceased on head with hockey like danda due to which he sustained injury and died. Dead body of the deceased was found concealed in a pit. Co-accused Pradeep Yadav who is brother of petitioner, in his confessional statement has named this petitioner who assaulted the deceased.
Considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties and materials available on record, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T