Ramfal Yadav And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.61788 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2017 Thana- SIMRA District- West Champaran ======================================================

1. Ramfal Yadav, S/o Paras Yadav,

2. Ranjeet Urao S/o Hari Kishun Uraon, Both are R/o VillageDholbajawa, P.S.- Semara, District- West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Prithvi Nath Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. SRI UMESHNAND PANDIT ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 13-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioners are in custody in connection with Semara P.S. Case No. 67 of 2017, a case under Sections 363, 34 of the the Indian Penal Code and Sections 302 and 201 was added later.

The father of the informant had gone to receive share in crop from the Bataidar but Bataidar could not meet. Hence, he was returning along with the petitioners and others. However, the victim did not reach his house and, subsequently, his dead body was found. During investigation, two witnesses, vide para5 of the case dairy, stated that the deceased was seen along with the petitioners in drunken condition. The petitioners had also

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.61788 of 2017(4) dt.13-02-2018 2/2 taken wine. Thereafter, they went away.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that there is no motive alleged against the petitioners and the circumstantial evidence of last seen is a weak circumstance, hence, the petitioners deserve bail.

Learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer on the ground that only pointer of commission of crime is against the petitioners and others named in the F.I.R. and against non else.

Considering the fact that a single circumstance is there against the petitioners, hence, the petitioners deserve pre trial bail. Accordingly, the petitioners, above named, are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court-below where the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid case, with condition that the petitioners shall fully cooperate with the investigation/trial of the case, failing which the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners. (Birendra Kumar, J) ajay gupta/- U T