Patna High CourtCR. MISC./14404/2017dismissed

Jogendar Thakur @ Jogi @ Jogi Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

2017-03-29Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.14404 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -11 Year- 2016 Thana -KAUAKOL District- NAWADA ======================================================

1. Jogendar Thakur @ Jogi @ Jogi Thakur son of Vishnudev Thakur resident of Village - Dainikhar, P.S. Khaira, District Jamui. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satya Prakash Parasar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madhuranand Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 29-03-2017 heard the parties.

This application is for grant of bail in connection with S.T.Case No.95 of 2017 arising out of Kouwakol P.S.Case No.11 of 2016 for the offence under Sections 364 (A) r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in the present case except the confessional statement of the co-accused, there is nothing against the petitioner and he is in custody since 17.11.2016.

Heard learned A.P.P. also, who could not controvert the aforesaid fact and has pointed out that the petitioner has criminal antecedent and he is accused in five serious cases, which will appear from Para no.3 of the petition.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14404 of 2017 (2) dt.29-03-2017 2/2 Having heard both sides and in view of criminal antecedent and also considering the fact that the sessions trial is now going on and the charges have been framed against him, as such at this stage, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, however, the learned trial court is directed to conduct the cases, if possible on day-to-day basis and at the same time, the S.P., Nawada is directed to ensure attendance of the witnesses on day-to-day basis before the court concerned so that the trial may be concluded within a period of nine months, and if not concluded the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the court concerned. With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U