Jitendra Kumar Rai @Jitendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37563 of 2015 (3) dt.03-02-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.37563 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -22 Year- 2013 Thana -SONBERSA District- SITAMARHI ======================================================

1. Jitendra Kumar Rai @ Jitendra Kumar Son of Sheoji Rai Resident of Village - Jai Nagar, P.S. - Sonbarsa, District - Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinod Kumar For the Opposite Party/s Mr. Ram Naresh Roy (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 03/ 03.02.2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State.

Earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner was twice rejected by this court and while rejecting prayer for bail of the petitioner on 11.3.2015, this court directed the trial court to conclude the trial of the petitioner within seven months from the date of receipt of order dated 11.3.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. no. 2107/2015 but it appears from the report of Addl. Sessions Judge I, Sitamarhi that up till now, only ten prosecution witnesses could be examined and still three prosecution witnesses including doctor have been left to be examined. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner and co-accused Mukesh Kumar was rejected by this court taking note of this fact that the deceased had disclosed name of the petitioner and co-accused Mukesh Kumar before the informant but co-accused Mukesh Kumar has been granted privilege

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37563 of 2015 (3) dt.03-02-2016 of bail by this court vide order dated 1.7.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. no. 17831/2015 taking note of this fact that in course of trial, informant disclosed that when he reached on the spot, deceased was not in a position to speak. It is submitted that case of the petitioner stands on similar footing to that of co-accused Mukesh Kumar. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi in Sonbarsa P.S. Case no. 22/2013.

shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J) U T