Dhananjay Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70224 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-218 Year-2019 Thana- HUSSAINGANJ District- Siwan ====================================================== Dhananjay Yadav Son Of Late Bindeshwari Yadav Resident Of Village - Daroga Hata Surapur (Chhapiya), P.S.- Hussainganj, District - Siwan. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vijay Bardhan Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Veena Rani Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 03-10-2023 The present petition has been filed to renew the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner which was earlier twice rejected vide orders dated 21.08.2020 and 18.08.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 19914 of 2020 and Cr. Misc. No. 34186 of 2021 respectively.

The allegation against the petitioner is of abducting the 13 years old son of the informant who has still not been recovered.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely

2/4 been implicated in this case. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R but during investigation, it came to light that petitioner who had an affairs with the daughter of the informant had told her that he had kidnapped her brother because of the informant marrying his daughter somewhere else and that he would also abduct the informant and kill them. Except this, nothing has come against the petitioner to connect him with the present case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he has been rotting in jail custody since 21.01.2020.

In contra, learned A.P.P appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submitted that there is strong motive with regard to the abduction of the minor son of the informant by the petitioner and till date, he has not been recovered. It is further submitted that petitioner was having an affair with the daughter of the informant but she was married somewhere else and to take

3/4 revenge, the same has been done. The informant had also received such information and threat from three different mobile numbers.

In pursuance to the direction of this Court vide order dated 26.07.2023, a report with regard to the present stage of the case has been received and it has been kept at Flag-T. The report of the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-VII, Siwan dated 31.07.2023 suggests that out of five charge-sheeted witnesses, four witnesses have been examined and the trial is likely to be concluded within six months. Considering the facts aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of bail to the petitioner for the present. The prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner stands rejected.

The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same positively within a period of six months from today.

The petitioner will be at liberty to renew his

4/4 prayer for bail if the trial is not concluded within a period of six months.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Shageer/- U T