Patna High CourtCR. MISC./6939/2024bail rejected

Amique Ali v. The State Of Bihar

2024-04-26Mr. Justice Shailendra Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6939 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-359 Year-2022 Thana- SASARAM NAGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== Amique Ali, S/O Sadique Ali, R/O Mohalla- Aimli Adam Khan, Ward No. 16, Sasaram, P.O And P.S- Sasaram Town, Distt.- Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jitendra Pd. Sinha, Adv.

Ms. Sripriya Sinha, Adv.

Mr. Rajeev Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 26-04-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. The matter has been placed for consideration of the petitioner's regular bail prayer in connection with S.Tr. Case No. 14/2023 arising out of Sasaram (T) P.S. Case No. 359 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under sections 498A, 304B and 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Mr. Jitendra Pd. Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner earlier preferred Cr. Misc. No. 43379/2023 for the relief of regular bail which was rejected by this Court vide order dated 31.07.2023 and the petitioner has again come for the said relief mainly on the ground of his incarceration period and no significant progress in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6939 of 2024(3) dt.26-04-2024 2/2 his trial. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has been languishing in jail since 07.05.2022 and in actual, the deceased who happened to be the wife of the petitioner fell down from stairs and sustained injuries and consequently, she died.

4. Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, learned APP for the State has opposed the bail prayer of the petitioner.

5. Considering the seriousness of the allegation appearing against this petitioner and also the report sent by the trial court regarding status of the petitioner's trial which shows that out of 8 prosecution's witnesses, 2 have been examined, in my view, the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail at this stage. Accordingly, the petitioner's bail prayer stands rejected.

6. The trial court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial of the petitioner in the next nine months and if the petitioner's trial is not concluded in the said period then the petitioner may renew his bail prayer.

(Shailendra Singh, J) annu/- U T