IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No. 28822 of 2011 1. Ramesh Yadav @ Ram Naresh Yadav S/O Sant Bilash Singh R/O Vill.- Ahirpurwa, P.S.- Ara Town , Distt.- Bhojpur. Versus 1. The State of Bihar ----------------- 03. 18.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offences under Sections 302 and 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case according to the informant is that his brother was shot dead by the accused persons. During investigation most of the witnesses stated that they had heard about the occurrence. However, in paragraph six the other brother of the deceased stated the manner in which the occurrence had taken place but he could not specify as to whether he is an eye-witness and he had heard about the occurrence. In paragraph 37 one eye-witness stated the manner in which the occurrence had taken place and that when the deceased was identified as Ram Babu his family members were informed and thereafter he was brought to the hospital but he died during treatment. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that there is no eye-witness to the occurrence to implicate 2 the petitioner and the other brother of the petitioner i.e Sri Niwas who has been examined in paragraph six has not specified that he is an eye-witness. Considering the nature of allegations, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. The prayer for bail is rejected. However, in view of ambiguous statement of the brother of the deceased in paragraph six the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of chare if his case is not bifurcated. Vikash/- (Anjana Prakash, J.)