Naresh Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.14542 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-318 Year-2017 Thana- GAYA MUFFSIL District- Gaya ====================================================== Naresh Chaudhary, Son of Seetal Chaudhary, Resident of Village- Goga, P.S.- Mifassil, Dist- Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Birendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant. The petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Mufassil P.S. Case No. 318 of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Informant is the brother of deceased, who in his written complaint has stated that on 21.10.2017 at about 9:00 PM all the nine named accused persons including the petitioner had come to the house of informant and took his brother with him for performing and participating in dance near goddess Laxmi. However, thereafter his brother did not return and in the morning he came to know that he has been killed and his dead body is lying near the Goga Ahar near the Mango tree. It has

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14542 of 2018(4) dt.12-04-2018 2/2 been further stated that informant and his brother has land dispute with accused No. 1 Munni Chaudhary and they had threatened to kill him on the same day.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no dispute with the informant or his deceased brother and even during investigation his brother has not named him as one of the persons who had come to his house from where the deceased accompanied them. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as is evident from the supplementary affidavit filed today. Petitioner is in custody since 25.10.2017. Learned counsel for the informant has vehementaly opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Gaya, in connection with Mufassil P.S. Case No. 318 of 2017.

(S. Kumar, J) veena/- U