Deoki Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.55099 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -69 Year- 2015 Thana -ROH District- NAWADA ====================================================== Deoki Yadav, son of late Chhotu Yadav, resident of village - Garhara, P.S. Roh, Dist - Nawada.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Gauri Shankar Prasad For the Opposite Party : Mr. Z.Abedin(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 03-02-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is an accused in connection with Roh P.S. Case No. 69 of 2015, registered under Sections 302 and 201/34 of Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of J.M. 1st Class, Nawada. The allegation of informant, namely, Urmila Devi is that on 15.08.2015 in the evening her husband Rajendra Yadav was grazing she-buffalo in the south of the village. At that time, Deoki Yadav (Petitioner) along with family members and others were engaged in the funeral ceremony of his son Surendra Yadav. The petitioner and others caught hold of her husband and started assaulting him by means of Khanti and Lathi. When the informant rushed to rescue her husband then she was also assaulted and after causing the death of her husband, they thrown the dead body of her husband in the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55099 of 2015 (4) dt.03-02-2016 2/2 pyre of Surendra Yadav.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that in fact Surendra Yadav, son of the petitioner, was murdered by the husband of the informant one day before the alleged occurrence regarding which Roh P.S. Case No. 68 of 2015 is instituted against the husband of the informant and others and only to save the skin, the informant has lodged this false case against the petitioner and others.

Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner for bail with submission that in paragraph nos. 18 and 19 of the case diary, witnesses have also supported the prosecution regarding causing the death of the husband of the informant by means of Lathi and Khanti and throwing the dead body on the pyre of Surendra Yadav by the petitioner and others. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner, above named, is rejected.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T