Naresh Yadav @ Naresh Gop v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82679 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-18 Year-2019 Thana- ATHMALGOLA District- Patna ====================================================== Naresh Yadav @ Naresh Gop, Son of Ramadhin Yadav, Resident of Village - Ghaghdih, P.S.- Bakhtiyarpur, Distt - Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate Ms. Babita Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 20-01-2020 Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Athmalgola P. S. Case No. 18 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Case of double murder and as the informant was sleeping at the place of occurrence, petitioner slashed the throat of Umesh Pandit and the throat of Prakash Yadav was also cut. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there are so many contradictions in the statement of the informant. As per the informant, after the occurrence, he informed his family members and went to his sasural, but the family members has examined during the investigation and from paragraphs 7 and 8 it has come on record that after the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82679 of 2019(3) dt.20-01-2020 2/2 occurrence, they have come to know in the morning about the murder of two persons and the conduct of the informant, i.e. in stead of going to his house also creates doubt his credibitiliy. It has further been submitted that petitioner is in custody since 18.02.2019.

Heard learned A.P.P. also, who has opposed the prayer for bail stating that at present there is statement of the informant that he was sleeping there and petitioner is one of the main assailant.

Having heard both sides, in view of the submissions, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. With the above observations, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sunil Shukla/- U T