← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./46463/2021dismissed

Vedu Yadav @ Vedu Kumar @ Ved Prakash Yadav @ Sato Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2022-06-14Mr. Justice Harish Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46463 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2020 Thana- MANPUR District- Nalanda ====================================================== Vedu Yadav @ Vedu Kumar @ Ved Prakash Yadav @ Sato Yadav S/O Lakhan Yadav R/O Village-Korari, P.S-Deepnagar, District-Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Chaudhary, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Umesh Lal Verma, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 14-06-2022 Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Umesh Lal Verma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks from today.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Manpur P. S. Case No. 02 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 457, 307, 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that this petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and his name has transpired on the confessional statement of one Rahul Kumar and except the confessional statement there is no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46463 of 2021(2) dt.14-06-2022 2/2 material on record which suggests the complicity of this petitioner in the present case.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has drawn the attention of this Court towards the criminal antecedent of this petitioner. Having considered the fact that this petitioner has been found involved in more than eleven cases of serious nature, this court is not persuaded to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the present application stands dismissed. (Harish Kumar, J) shakir/- U T