Rajesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 54192 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2020 Thana- KATORIYA District- Banka ====================================================== Rajesh Yadav Son of Jagdeo Yadav Resident of Village - Belony, Police Station - Katoria, District - Banka.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Adv.

: Mr. Baxi SRP Sinha, Sr. Adv.

: Mr. Krishna Mohan, Adv.

: Mr. Praveen Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 28-11-2022 Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within two weeks from today.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Katoriya P.S. Case No. 41 of 2020, lodged under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that marriage of his daughter was solemnized with the petitioner 2 years back and there was demand of 2 lakh rupees to do business. On the day of 12.03.2022, informant received information that her daughter was murdered and thrown in a canal situated about half kilometer away from the house of deceased's in-laws. When the informant reached at the house of his daughter's in-laws, he saw the dead body of her daughter and the weapon used in the crime was also there. Informant alleged

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 54192 of 2021(8) dt.28-11-2022 2/2 that his daughter's in-laws' family killed his daughter for demand of dowry and thrown her body in forest. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He also submits that antecedent of the petitioner is clean and he is in custody since 03.08.2021 and, charge-sheet has already been filed in this case. He further submits that cognizance has been taken on 13.04.2022 Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that it is a case of 2020, whereas process of 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. have been issued against the petitioner, only thereafter, he surrendered. He also submits that if petitioner shall release on bail, he shall create every hurdle in trial.

In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner but liberty is hereby granted that he may renew prayer for bail 4 months after date of framing of charge. Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as earliest as possible.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) ashishsingh/- U T