Patna High CourtCR. MISC./20855/2016rejected

Jitendra Kumar Singh @ Jitendra Pratap Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2016-05-18Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.20855 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -473 Year- 2014 Thana -BHABHUA District- BHABHUA (KAIMUR) ====================================================== Jitendra Kumar Singh @ Jitendra Pratap Singh son of Late Satendra Pratap Singh, Resident of village- Kanta, P.S.- Saidraja, District- Chandauli (U.P.), At present village- Akhlaspur, P.S.- Bhabhua, Dist.- Kaimur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jogendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arbind Kr.Pandey(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 18-05-2016 The petitioner wants to renew his prayer of bail in connection with Bhabhua P. S. Case No. 473 of 2014 pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Kaimur at Bhabhua which was earlier rejected by order dated 27.10.2015 passed in Criminal Misc. No. 29117 of 2015 on the ground that the petitioner is in custody since 01.06.2015, within the stipulated period, the trial has not been concluded and due to land dispute, the occurrence has taken place.

The learned APP duly assisted by the learned counsel or the informant opposes the prayer of bail by submitting that the petitioner has caused firearm injury on the right jaw of the informant and earlier the defence took time on one ground

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20855 of 2016 (3) dt.18-05-2016 2/2 and the other resulting charges were framed on 22.02.2016 itself and up till now six prosecution witnesses have already been examined and PW-7 has also been partly cross-examined. In the facts and circumstances stated above, at present, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and accordingly his such prayer stands rejected.

However, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within two months after taking the same on day to day basis from receipt or production of a copy of this order failing which the petitioner may be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail, if at no fault.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Mishra/- U T