Md. Meraj v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.14801 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -200 Year- 2016 Thana -KUCHAIKOTE District- GOPALGANJ ====================================================== Md. Meraj, son of Sattar Miya, resident of village- Rampur Khereya, P.S.- Kuchaikote, District- Gopalganj, Bihar.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Indrajeet Bhushan For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arbind Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 18-04-2017 Heard both sides.

The petitioner Md. Meraj seeks bail in Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 200 of 2016 under Section 302 and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant alleged that he went to his Sasural and when he returned on the same day, he did not find his son Jitan Yadav @ Jitendra Yadav in the house. On query, his daughter told that Jitan Yadav @ Jitendra Yadav went along with Bhola Mian, but he did not return. After sometime, the informant received information that the dead body of his son was found hanging in a tree.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Bhola Mian went with the deceased. The petitioner is not named in the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14801 of 2017 (2) dt.18-04-2017 2/3 F.I.R. The name of the petitioner figured in the confessional statement of Bhola Mian and save and except the aforesaid confession, there is no other material on record to show involvement of the petitioner in murder of Jitan Yadav @ Jitendra Yadav. Similarly situated co-accused Mohammaddin Mian @ Mohemmeddin Miyan has already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 31.01.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 55672 of 2016. The case of the petitioner stands on same footing. On the other hand, learned Additional P.P. as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that in paragraph- 9, 10 and onwards of the case diary, the witnesses had stated that the petitioner also participated in murder of the deceased along with Bhola Mian, but from perusal of the statement of the witnesses it appears that they are not the eye witnesses of the occurrence and they are simply hearsay witnesses.

Considering the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation made against the petitioner, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Gopalganj in connection with Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 200 of 2016, G.R. No. 2940 of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14801 of 2017 (2) dt.18-04-2017 3/3 2016.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BTiwary/- U T