Patna High CourtCR. MISC./24012/2017dismissed

Sunil Gond v. The State Of Bihar

2017-07-07Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.24012 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -469 Year- 2016 Thana -BAGHA DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ======================================================

1. Sunil Gond Son of Rabindra Sah Gond@ Ravindra Gond Resident of Village- Sikitiya Machhargawa, P.S.- Bagaha, District- West Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. R.S. Sahay, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kr Singh No. 1 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nityanand ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 07-07-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bagaha P.S. Case No. 469 of 2016, registered for offences punishable under Section 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against the petitioner is of killing the son of the informant.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner himself happens to be the son-in-law of the informant the allegation against the petitioner that he killed the son of the informant, who is brother-in-law of the petitioner, is out and out false and concocted one. Further there was dispute between the petitioner and informant's family with regard to fact that wife of the petitioner was living in her maike and despite several requests,

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24012 of 2017 (4) dt.07-07-2017 2/2 she was not coming along with him and only due to the suspicion, petitioner has been made accused in this case. Further petitioner has been in judicial custody since 14.12.2016. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted it was the petitioner, who took the boy with himself and, thereafter, his dead body was recovered. Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail, his application for regular bail is, accordingly, rejected.

However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within a period of nine months and if the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail in the court below itself.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T