Allowed

Degan Yadav v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC30 Nov 2022CR. MISC./45742/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This oral order grants regular bail to the petitioner in a murder case under Sections 302, 201, and 34 of the IPC. The bench noted clean antecedents, general and suspicious FIR allegations, and completion of investigation, releasing him on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

petitioner be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each.

Degan Yadav Vs the State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45742 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2021 Thana- JHAJHA RAIL P.S. District- Lakhisarai

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Degan Yadav Son Of Late Ramprasad Yadav Resident Of Village- Rajla, P.S.Jhajha, District- Jamui

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, A.P.P.

¶10

======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 30-11-2022

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to

¶14

remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within one month.

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

¶16

Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Jhajha Rail P.S. Case No. 21 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

As per the prosecution, the informant’s husband was murdered by this petitioner along with other co-accused persons and the dead body was recovered from the railway track.

¶18

The main submissions advanced by the learned counsel Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary appearing for the

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45742 of 2022(2) dt.30-11-2022 2/3

¶20

petitioner are that the petitioner has fair and clean antecedent and there is no specific allegation against him in the FIR and he was not alleged to be the part of the group of accused persons who threatened the deceased just ten days before the alleged occurrence of murder and co-accused persons namely Mukka Yadav @ Mukesh Yadav, Kaiyum Miya @ Abdul Kaiyum and Basudeo Turi have been granted bail by different Benches of this Court vide orders passed in Cr. Misc. No. 6131 of 2022, 55101 of 2021 and 7924 of 2022 respectively, and the case of this petitioner stands on similar footing with them.

¶21

Learned APP Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh appearing for the State has opposed the bail prayer.

¶22

Heard both the sides and perused the FIR and the order impugned. The petitioner has clean and fair antecedent as mentioned in his petition, in the FIR only suspicion was raised by the informant regarding petitioner’s involvement in the alleged murder of her husband and similarly situated some coaccused persons are on bail and three co-accused persons were alleged to have threatened the deceased ten days before the alleged occurrence in following with a quarrel having taken place between their children but the petitioner was not alleged to be present along with the said co-accused persons when the

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45742 of 2022(2) dt.30-11-2022 3/3

¶24

alleged threatening was given and against the petitioner investigation has been completed as per the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and the informant is not stated to be an eye-witness of the alleged occurrence of murder and the allegation made in the FIR is general and omnibus and the same relates to suspicion only. Considering all these facts as well as above submissions, in the opinion of this Court, a lenient approach can be taken in respect of the petitioner’s prayer, let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court in connection with Jhajha Rail P.S. Case No. 21 of 2021.

¶25

(Shailendra Singh, J.)

¶26

Prashant/-

¶27

U T

Degan Yadav v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Degan Yadav v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Hakim Vs The State of Bihar

Rambabu Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Raja Kumar Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Bablu Kumar @ Bablu Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Amit Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Mohit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar