Patna High CourtCR. MISC./46303/2024dismissed

Anuj Kumar @ Akindra Yadav @ Akindra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-01-28Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46303 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-418 Year-2022 Thana- MADHUBAN District- East Champaran ====================================================== Anuj Kumar @ Akindra Yadav @ Akindra Kumar S/O Satyanarayan Yadav @ Satranayan Yadav R/O Village-Nayagaon, P.S-Nayagaon, District-Sheohar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sunil Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dr. Indiwar Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 28-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Learned counsel for the State Shri Jharkhandi Upadhyay has filed counter affidavit in this case.

2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for grant of regular bail as earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 1.11.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 68998 of 2023 which reads as under:- Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

2. Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within a period of four weeks from today.

3. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Madhuban P.S. Case No.

418 of 2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 34 of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46303 of 2024(4) dt.28-01-2025 2/2 Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

4. Though the assailant of the deceased is Balmiki Singh who was riding the motorcycle with Vishwanath Singh, the name of the petitioner has come during investigation that he is a contract killer and he has also participated in the crime.

5. In view of the facts and circumstances, as mentioned above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the prayer of bail of the petitioner is rejected herewith.

7. The Court below is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner.

3. In the trial, out of nine witnesses, three witnesses have already been examined.

4. Considering the fact that the trial of the petitioner is in progress and also considering the fact that he is a contract killer, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Accordingly, this application is dismissed again. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U