Raushan Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7978 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-195 Year-2015 Thana- PATAHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Raushan Singh S/o Chandrakesh Singh @ Chandraket Singh @ Chandan Singh R/o Vill - Delho, P.S. - Madhuban, Dist. - East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bal Govind Sharma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Amitesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 13-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 364, 302, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner along with other accused persons is said to have killed the husband of the informant.

4. Vide order dated 28.06.2024, a report was called for from the learned Court below regarding the stage of trial and the time likely to be taken in conclusion of the trial. In compliance thereof, a report dated 20.07.2024 has been sent by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-05th, East Champaran, Motihari, which is kept on record. In his report, the learned

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7978 of 2024(6) dt.13-09-2024 2/2 Judge has, inter alia, stated the anticipated time to conclude the trial is three months.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence and has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that the petitioner has been made accused in the present case merely on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Amrendra Pandey. He further submits that the petitioner is languishing in custody since 20.08.2016. The petitioner has twenty four criminal antecedents as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

6. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the anticipated time to conclude the trial is three months, the Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer of regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected in connection with Patahi P.S. Case No. 195 of 2015.

8. However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T