Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Santosh YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
REJECTED

Holding

Bail was denied as the allegations were direct and specific and the trial was at an advanced stage.

Summary

Santosh Yadav was arrested on 12 February 2024 in connection with a murder case (Sections 302 and 34 IPC) arising from an alleged assault on the wife of an informant, resulting in her death. The petitioner filed a bail application, contending that the FIR was fabricated and that he had not committed any offence. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the direct and specific allegations in the FIR and the seriousness of the charge. The trial court had already examined all seven prosecution witnesses and the case was at the stage of recording statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The High Court, noting the specific allegations and the advanced stage of trial, refused the bail prayer and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a murder case where the FIR contains direct and specific allegations and the trial is at the Section 313 stage.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • murder
  • IPC
  • Section 302
  • Section 34
  • Section 313
  • criminal procedure
  • trial stage

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68781 of 2024
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2024 Thana- BARHARIA District- Siwan
                 ======================================================
                 Santosh Yadav Son of Late Pundev Chaudhary Resident of Village -
                 Nawalpur, Police Station - Barahariya, District - Siwan

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Bijay Prakash Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Mohammad Sufyan, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   16-03-2026                    Heard Mr.Bijay Prakash Singh,                 learned counsel

                   for the petitioner and Mr.Mohammad Sufyan, learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

                   12.02.2024 in connection with S.Tr.No.257 of 2024, arising

                   out of Barahariya P.S.Case No.44 of 2024, F.I.R. dated

                   08.02.2024 registered for the offence punishable under

                   Sections 302 and 34 of IPC.

                                3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he

                   alongwith one Jitendra Yadav assaulted the wife of informant

                   by means of iron rod resulting she died.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

                   submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68781 of 2024(4) dt.16-03-2026
                                            2/3




          fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as

          alleged in the FIR.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that

          it appears from the FIR that there is direct and specific

          allegation of assault attributed against the petitioner and

          injured wife of the informant namely Kavita Devi died during

          her treatment.

                       6. Vide order dated 31.01.2026, a report was called

          for with regard to the stage of the trial. Report of the learned

          Trial Court dated 18.02.2026 reveals that all seven witnesses

          have been examined. The prosecution evidence has been

          closed on 17.02.2026 itself and the case record reveals that

          the present case is at the stage of statement under Section 313

          Cr.P.C.

                       7. Considering the aforesaid facts, there is direct and

          specific allegation against the petitioner in the FIR and report

          of the learned Trial Court, I am not inclined to enlarge the

          petitioner on bail in connection with S.Tr.No.257 of 2024,

          arising out of Barahariya P.S.Case No.44 of 2024, pending in

          the court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-

          IX, Siwan.
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68781 of 2024(4) dt.16-03-2026
                                                           3/3




                                      8. Prayer is refused.

                                      9. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to

                         expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.



                                                (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-

U          T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.