Harendra Yadav @ Harendra Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51398 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-107 Year-2020 Thana- NARAINPUR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Harendra Yadav @ Harendra Kumar Singh Son of Ram Narayan Yadav @ Ram Narayan Singh Resident of Village - Kamal Tola, P.S.- Chandi, Dist. - Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajani Ranjan Pd. Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Nirmal Kumar Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2.
29-11-2021 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner seeks bail in Narayanpur P.S. Case No. 107 of 2020 (S.T. No. 28 of 2021) registered for the offence under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and later on, Section 302 of the I.P.C. was added.
As per the prosecution case, on 01.11.2010, in the night, the petitioner, who is informant of the case, gave written statement that while he was sleeping in his house, one firing was made from the window of the room, which hit in the neck of his wife, as a result of which, during course of treatment, she died. It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that name of the petitioner has surfaced during course of investigation on the basis of call details record (C.D.R.) of mobile of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51398 of 2021(2) dt.29-11-2021 2/2 It is further submitted that if the petitioner had any intention to kill his wife, he would have never taken his wife to hospital for treatment. Petitioner is in custody since 22.11.2020. However, learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the bail petition and submitted that during course of investigation, sufficient material has come that petitioner has killed his wife.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and same is, accordingly, rejected. However, from perusal of the impugned order, it is apparent that the case is running for prosecution evidence, therefore, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J.) anay U T