The High Court of Patna declined to grant bail to the petitioner, who was in judicial custody accused of murder and other offences, citing the brutal nature of the crime and the postmortem report indicating complicity.
Bail application of the petitioner rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.75839 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-286 Year-2018 Thana- AMARPUR District- Banka
======================================================
Nilesh Yadav S/o Parmanand Yadav Resident of Village-Chilkawar Dumariya,Police Station Rajoun,Distt.-Banka
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Mukherjee For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Yogendra Kumar Singh ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER
3 18-01-2019
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since
01.06.2018 in connection with Amarpur P.S. Case No. 286 of 2018 for offences punishable under Sections 302, 120(B)/34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
The prosecution case as lodged by the informant is that her husband was called by the petitioner to meet the Mukhiya namely Manohar Pandit @ Munna for some accounting and commission who went along with his younger brother. Thereafter, the younger brother came after some time stating therein that the petitioner along with three other coaccused had resorted to indiscriminate firing and when the informant went place of occurrence found her husband dead on the spot.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.75839 of 2018(3) dt.18-01-2019 2/2
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he works as a Munsi to the other co-accused and he had just called the informant for some accounting with the Mukhiya, Manohar Pandit @ Munna. It is further submitted that the deceased himself was a veteran criminal and three cases under serious offences were pending against him. He further submits that charge-sheet has already been submitted and there is no allegation of tampering with the prosecution witnesses.
However, learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail stating therein that the informant’s husband was brutally murdered and as per the postmortem report there are four entry wounds on the vital part of the body, hence, the complicity of the petitioner is evident.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and materials on record, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner in connection with Amarpur P.S. Case No. 286 of 2018 pending before the court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka.
The bail application is accordingly, rejected.
(Nilu Agrawal, J)
devendra/- U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of murder under Section 302 IPC.
Whether the gravity of the offence and evidence of complicity warrant refusal of bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Nilesh Yadav
The State Of Bihar
Nilu Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
