Saryun Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52795 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-343 Year-2020 Thana- SIRDALA District- Nawada ====================================================== SARYUN YADAV Bhagirath Yadav Resident of Village- Adhganwan, P.S.- Meskaur, District- Nawada.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sudish Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bal Mukund Prasad Sinha, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Shiv Kumar Prasad, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 05-04-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant. The case is under Sections 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Sirdala P.S. Case No. 343 of 2020 ( Sessions Trial No. 81/2021/10/2021) lodged on 1st of September, 2021.

Petitioner and the deceased were 'SHADHU'. The deceased's son who is the informant in this case alleged that the accused took his father on 30th of August, 2020 to witness Muharram possession. As his father failed to return, he inquired from his 'Mousa' (petitioner herein) who said that he had parted with him yesterday itself. Later the dead body of his father was found on 01.09.2020 near 'Aahar'. Upon confronting his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52795 of 2021(2) dt.05-04-2022 2/2 'Mousa' he accepted that he along with his associates killed him after argument during liquor consumption. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no eye witness to the occurrence and he is languishing in jail for long time.

Learned counsel for the informant submits that he despite being the 'SHADHU', took the deceased on the pretext of watching Muharram procession and later along with his associate killed the informant's father.

Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court for the present is not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner. The same is accordingly rejected. The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Jagdish/- U T