Yogendra Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.38291 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -52 Year- 2018 Thana -BANMANKHI District- PURNIA ====================================================== Yogendra Sah, Son of Late Basudev Sah, R/o Village- Bela Chand, P.S.- Banmankhi, District- Purnea.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Dr. Bidhu Ranjan, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-09-2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to add Section 302 in paragraph 1. of the bail petition. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Banmankhi P.S. Case No. 52/2018, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 325, 307, 379, 504 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

It is alleged that while the informant and family members were cleaning their land through labour for construction of the house, the petitioner and others armed with various weapons came there and assaulted the informant and family members. There is specific allegation against petitioner that he assaulted

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38291 of 2018 (6) dt.18-09-2018 2/2 father of the informant by iron rod causing injury on his head. The father of the informant succumbed to the injuries. It has been submitted that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. He is in custody since 21.04.2018.

Considering the fact that there is specific allegation against petitioner that he assaulted the father of the informant with iron rod causing his death, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. However, trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within one year from date of receipt/production of copy of order passed by this court. If trial is not concluded within one year petitioner may renew his prayer for bail. (S. Kumar, J) Vinita/- U T