Jay Ram Yadav @ Jay Ram Kr. Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.4951 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -178 Year- 2015 Thana -AMARPUR District- BANKA ====================================================== Jay Ram Yadav @ Jay Ram Kr. Yadav Son of Uchit Yadav, Resident of Village- Posraha, Police Station- Katoriya (O.P. Suiya), District- Banka. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Mukherjee, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Sucheta Yadav(APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 28-04-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Amarpur (Fullidumar) P.S. Case No. 178/2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a local villager and sometimes used to drive motorcycle. It is submitted that since the deceased had to go to Sahebganj, the petitioner was called from his house to take him thereat. It is further submitted that after reaching Sahebganj, the petitioner was directed to return back. Subsequently, the dead body of the deceased was found at a distance of 15 kilometer from

the village. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that though there was an enmity between the deceased and other two accused persons namely Ramdeo Yadav and Chano Yadav for exchanged of money and that two other accused persons namely Arjun Yadav and Kamdeo Yadav had threatened the father of the deceased. So far as the present petitioner is concerned, there was no motive or any enmity or any allegation against him, so as to necessitate the commission of such an offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and only because of the last seen theory, the petitioner's name has been roped in the present context. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that save and except the aforementioned allegation against the petitioner, there is no further material in the case diary so as to draw finger at the petitioner.

Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstance and that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent, let the petitioner above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka in connection with Amarpur (Fullidumar) P.S. Case No. 178/2015 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (Anjana Mishra, J.) Amit/- U T