Patna High CourtCR. MISC./2508/2022bail rejected

Pratap Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2022-03-09Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2508 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2020 Thana- BARAULI District- Gopalganj ====================================================== PRATAP SINGH S/o Raj Mohan Singh R/o village- Mirzapur, P.S.- Barauli, District- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sumit Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dilip Kumar No. 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 09-03-2022 Heard Mr. Sumit Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner renews his prayer for bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 147 of 2020 arising out of Barauli P.S. Case No. 27 of 2020 registered for the offence under Section 302 of the I.P.C. inasmuch as earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected by this Court by order dated 03 / 12 / 2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 24384 of 2020 granting liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after one year if the trial does not show any progress.

Petitioner allegedly dashed the nephew of the informant by truck driving rashly and negligently due to which he died on the spot.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2508 of 2022(3) dt.09-03-2022 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 04 / 02 / 2020. This court vide its order dated 2 / 2 / 2022 has called for a report regarding the present stage of the trial and in pursuance thereof the report has been furnished by learned District and Sessions Judge, Gopalganj vide letter no. 760 dated 11 / 02 / 2022 and from perusal of the same it appears that out of six charge sheet witnesses, five witnesses have been examined and only one witness is to be examined and the District and Sessions Judge, Gopalganj has given the estimated time for completion of the trial within three months. In view of the fact that trial is at the verge of completion, I am not inclined to consider the prayer for bail of the petitioner at this stage.

Accordingly, the same is rejected.

However, if the trial does not conclude within three months, petitioner may approach this court again for grant of bail.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) praful/- U T