Uma Kant Thakur @ Umakant @ Harkhu Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.57059 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -54 Year- 2012 Thana -SAHARGHAT District- MADHUBANI ====================================================== UMA KANT THAKUR @ UMAKANT @ HARKHU THAKUR son of Pulkit Thakur, resident of village- Sahar South, P.S.- Saharghat, DistrictMadhubani .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. R.B.Roy Raman(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 12-02-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Saharghat P.S. Case No. 54 of 2012 registered for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly the petitioner earlier gave two knife blow on the neck of Gharju @ Govind Thakur, the husband of the informant and when her husband after fleeing from there came in the room again the petitioner gave knife blow in his abdomen and near the chest and thereafter in the way to hospital, the husband of the informant died.

Submission is of false implication and that due to

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57059 of 2015 (4) dt.12-02-2016 2/2 dispute of some amount, the aforesaid occurrence has taken place. There was no intention to commit murder and the petitioner is suffering in custody since 09.04.2013, up till now the trial has not been concluded and, as such, he deserves sympathetic consideration.

The learned APP opposes the prayer of bail by submitting that the petitioner is the assailant and brutally killed his own brother.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner serious in nature, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably within six months after taking all positive steps to secure the attendance of remaining prosecution witnesses.

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