Patna High CourtCR. MISC./56646/2015rejected

Matiullah @ Md. Matiull @ Moti Ullah v. The State Of Bihar

2016-02-05Mr. Justice Shivaji Pandey2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.56646 of 2015 (3) dt.05-02-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.56646 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -310 Year- 2013 Thana -PIRBAHOR District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Matiullah @ Md. Matiull @ Moti Ullah Son of Mohi Bullah Resident of Village- Sikandarpur, P.S.-Sakandarpur, Dist.-Balia, at present alamganj Machhua Toli, P.S. Alamganj, Dist.-Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar No 13 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umeshanand Pandit(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 05-02-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

In this case, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial No.1355 of 2013, arising out of Pirbahore P.S. Case No.310 of 2013, registered for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation has been made against the petitioner that he has caused death to his wife.

This Court has called report from the Special Sessions Judge, N.I.A.-cum-Additional District & Sessions Judge-VII, Patna, who has reported that out of nine witnesses seven witnesses have been examined.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.56646 of 2015 (3) dt.05-02-2016 order in the bail application was passed on 15.1.2015. He further submits that last witness has been examined on 21.10.2014 and thereafter the trial has not moved further.

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected. However, the Trial Court is directed to ensure the production of the rest witnesses and conclude the trial as early as possible preferably within a period of six months. The prosecution side is also directed to produce left out witnesses so that trial may be completed within the aforesaid period. If the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period, the petitioner will have a liberty to renew his prayer for bail. (Shivaji Pandey, J) pawan/- U