Patna High CourtCR. MISC./52395/2015rejected

Subhash Singh @ Subash Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2015-12-16Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.52395 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -98 Year- 2012 Thana -AMNAUR District- SARAN ====================================================== Subhash Singh @ Subash Singh, son of Lalan Singh resident of village - Kashimpur, P.S. Amnour, District - Saran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER -------------- 16-12-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Amnour P.S. Case No.98 of 2012, corresponding to Sessions Trial No.321 of 2013, registered under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of A.D.J.-III, Saran at Chapra. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that earlier the prayer of the petitioner, who happens to be the husband of the deceased, for grant of bail was rejected by this Court twice on merit, which would appear from Annexure-'1 series' to this Application. The petitioner is in custody since 21.12.2012 but the trial of the petitioner has not been concluded as

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.52395 of 2015 (3) dt.16-12-2015 2/2 yet.

The report regarding the present status of the case, as called for vide order dated 02.12.2015 passed by this Court, has been received vide letter no.120 of 2015 dated 08.12.2015 from the court of Additional Sessions Judge-III, Saran at Chapra, from which it appears that out of the seven prosecution witnesses, three witnesses have been examined and cross examined in the case and the next date has been fixed as 19.12.2015 for further evidence of the prosecution witnesses.

I find no fresh ground to reconsider the prayer of the petitioner for grant of bail. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of bail is again rejected. However, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner as early as possible, preferably, within one year.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U