IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.31347 of 2010 1. RAMNANDAN YADAV, SON OF AMBIKA YADAV 2. SURENDRA YADAV 3. MAHENDRA YADAV, BOTH SONS OF BALESHWAR YADAV. All residents of village Harnaut, P.S. Harnaut, District Nalanda. --- petitioners. Versus STATE OF BIHAR—Opp. Party. ----------- 2/ 25-08-2010 Heard the parties. In a criminal prosecution registered under section 302 and some other allied offences under the Indian Penal Code, altogether twelve persons including the petitioners are named in the F.I.R., vide Annexure-1 as accused. According to prosecution case Suresh Prasad @ Mahendra Prasad (deceased), while selling medicines at his medical shop, is alleged to have refused to give an injection to one three year son of co-accused Sunil Yadav and instead advised him to take the boy to the hospital for treatment due to his critical condition, but that boy is said to have died in the way before he could be taken to hospital. For the aforesaid reason an altercation is said to have taken place between the members of prosecution party and accused persons . All the accused persons are alleged to have assaulted the deceased Suresh Prasad @ Mahendra Prasad by brick, 2 stone, lathi etc., but he was still surviving and thereafter co-accused Gandhi Yadav is further alleged to have assaulted him by a brick on his head and on different parts of body. Aforesaid Suresh Prasad @ Mahendra Prasad ( deceased) was brought to Patna for treatment and during the course of treatment he is said to have died. It is submitted that even according to prosecution case the petitioners are not alleged to have caused any specific injury to the deceased, rather the allegation against them is general and omnibus. Specific allegation of assault is against co-accused Gandhi Yadav , yet the deceased did not die on the spot. By referring to the subsequent fardbeyan of the informant, which was recorded after the death of deceased at Patna, it is submitted that in that fardbeyan the petitioners have not even been named specifically as accused. It is also contended that even if the prosecution case is accepted, then in that case also the offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code shall not be attracted against the petitioners and hardly a case under section 304 of the Indian Penal Code could be attracted. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the above named 3 petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda at Bihar Sharif in Harnaut P.S. Case No. 63 of 2010. BTiwary/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)