Binesh Yadav And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.27672 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -90 Year- 2014 Thana -DULHIN BAZAR District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Binesh Yadav Son of Ram Vilash Yadav

2. Ram Pravesh Yadav Son of Jaynandan Yadav Both residents of Village - Bharatpura, P.S. - Dulhin Bazar, District - Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajeev Nayan (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 22-07-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioners seek bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 15 of 2015 arising out of Dulhin Bazar P.S. Case No. 90 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under sections 302, 201 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prayer for bail of the petitioners was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 04.03.2015 passed in Cr.Misc. No. 51635 of 2014.

It has been contended that another co-accused whose case is identically situated to that of the petitioners, namely, Sanjay Yadav has already been granted bail by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.03.2015 passed in Cr.Misc. No. 382 of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.27672 of 2015 (3) dt.22-07-2015 2/2 2015. It has been stated that the charges have been framed and one of the prosecution witnesses Shikanti Devi has already been examined during trial.

Be that as it may, regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners for the present. Accordingly, their prayer for bail is rejected.

The trial court is directed to conclude the trial as early as possible preferably within nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order, failing which the petitioners would be at liberty to renew their prayer for bail. (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Pradeep/- U T