IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.43229 of 2010 SURENDRA PRASAD YADAV @ SURENDRA PRASAD S/O LATE YADUNANDAN BHAGAT Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 15.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the informant and the state. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 447,324,326,307/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It appears that the petitioner is the brother of the informant and son of the deceased and there was a land dispute between them for which reason the deceased had also given an application that she apprehended danger from the present petitioner who used to constantly threaten for property. Further submission is that in paragraph 7 one eye-witness has stated that the petitioner was abusing the deceased along with his other family members, where after one of the unknown person who came to the place of the occurrence shot at the deceased in paragraph 14 an eyewitness stated that the petitioner and the other accused persons came there and fired at the deceased on account of which 2 he died. Considering the facts of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner for present. Prayer for bail is rejected. However, the petitioner will be liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. It is made clear that the petitioner’s case shall not be bifurcated for purposes of commitment or framing of charge and in case it is done so, the prayer for bail shall not be considered. Fahad. ( Anjana Prakash, J.)