Jitendra Sahani v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2961 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-477 Year-2020 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East Champaran ====================================================== JITENDRA SAHANI S/o Yadav Lal Sahani @ Jadav Lal Sahani R/o VillageRaghunathpur Ward no. 04, P.S.- Raghunathpur O.P. Turkauliya, Distt- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ranjana Srivastava, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Turkauliya (Raghunathpur) P.S. Case No. 477 of 2020, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 302, 120(B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submitted that the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 27.04.2022 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 56156 of 2021 with liberty to renew his prayer for bail, if no substantial progress takes place in conduct of the trial.
4. A report was called for regarding stage of the trial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2961 of 2023(6) dt.12-04-2023 2/2 from the learned Court below and in compliance of the same, the learned 20th Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Motihar, East Champaran vide letter No. 216, dated 25.02.2023 informed that out of six prosecution witnesses, two witnesses have been examined and summons against the remaining witnesses have already been issued.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the fact that petitioner is facing trial for offence allegedly to have been committed under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of regular bail is rejected.
6. However, the learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously. The Superintendent of Police, East Champaran is directed to produce the prosecution witnesses on each and every date fixed by the learned trial Court.
7. With above observation, the application filed on behalf of the petitioner stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J) manish/- U T