Botal Mahto @ Siku Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.47917 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -236 Year- 2014 Thana -BUXAR MUFFSIL District- BUXAR ======================================================

1. Botal Mahto @ Siku Singh, S/o Rabisahnkar Mahto Resident of VillRatnarh P.S.- Garahani, District- Bhojpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Ranjan Pd. Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Kr.Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 28-04-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offences punishable under sections 307, 341, 324, 326 and 302/34 of the I.P.C and section 27 of the Arms Act.

Allegedly, the petitioner and two co-accused Sandip Yadav and Chandan Giri along with unknown stopped the motorcycle of son of the informant and in presence of Tarkeshwar Paswan opened indiscriminate firing upon Ranjit Kumar Ojha @ Bablu Ojha, the son of the informant, and earlier Sanjay Yadav has caused threats to kill the son of the informant. Submission is of false implication and that the informant is not an eye witness of the occurrence, there is no

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47917 of 2015 (4) dt.28-04-2016 2/2 specific allegation against the petitioner and without any motive the petitioner has been implicated in this case resulting he is suffering in custody since 26.11.2014, to which the learned A.P.P. seriously opposes by submitting that during investigation Tarkeshwar Paswan being an eye witness has named the petitioner that the petitioner and two co-accused shot Ranjit Kumar Ojha @ Bablu Ojha and during treatment Ranjit Kumar Ojha @ Bablu Ojha died, the petitioner has also got criminal antecedent. In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, serious in nature, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and accordingly his such prayer stands rejected in connection with S.Tr. No. 50 of 2015 arising out of Buxar (M) P.S. Case No. 236 of 2014 pending in the court of 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Buxar.

However, considering detention of the petitioner, let the trial be expedited and concluded preferably within a period of nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

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