← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./39271/2020bail rejected

Yogendra Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2021-03-02Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No 39271 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2020 Thana- ASARGANJ District- Munger ====================================================== 1.

YOGENDRA YADAV S/o Late Khepri Yadav R/o village- Makwa, P.S.- Asarganj, Distt.- Munger 2.

FULAN DEVI W/o Yogendra Yadav R/o village- Makwa, P.S.- Asarganj, Distt.- Munger ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr Kumar Kamal Nayan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr Nitya Nand Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 02-03-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

The petitioners seek bail in Asarganj Police Station (for brevity PS) Case No 39 of 2020 dated 14.06.2020 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201/34 of Indian Penal Code.

Allegation in the First Information Report is that the informant's daughter has been done to death at her in-laws' house.

Petitioners' counsel submits that petitioners are fatherin-law and mother-in-law of the victim. They are aged persons and have no concern with the affairs of the deceased with her

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39271 of 2020(3) dt.02-03-2021 2/2 husband. They have been implicated only due to their relationship with the husband of deceased.

Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail. Referring to the case diary, it is submitted that in the investigation, it has come to light that the petitioners have also been subjecting the victim to assault from time to time for nonfulfillment of demand for some money. The dead body of the deceased has been recovered from the well, next to the house in the orchard. In the circumstances, complicity of the petitioners cannot be ruled out.

Having regard to the submissions advanced by the parties, this Court, for the present, is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Prayer is rejected.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- U T