Shashi Bhushan Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17776 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-210 Year-2020 Thana- GAURICHAK District- Patna ====================================================== Shashi Bhushan Singh Son of Late Mishri Singh Resident of Village- Hander, P.S.- Gaurichak, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Deepak Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ahmad Ali, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 03-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with S.Tr. No.13 of 2021, arising out of Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 210 of 2020 lodged under Sections 448, 504, 506, 302, 120B and 34 of the I.P.C. read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected twice, firstly vide order dated 17.11.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No.70423 of 2021 and secondly, vide order dated 02.08.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No.35437 of 2023.

4. Learned counsel further submits that in the first bail application, liberty was granted to him to renew his prayer for bail 6 months after framing of charge and trial court was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17776 of 2024(3) dt.03-05-2024 2/3 directed to expedite the trial.

5. Counsel further submits that progress report of the trial court has been intimated in which trial court sought 12 months for completion of the trial. Therefore on this ground, the bail application of the petitioner was rejected. He further submits that from the date of rejection i.e., 02.08.2023, no progress has been made in the evidence and case is still awaiting for evidence.

6. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

7. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that on the previous occasion, progress report of the trial has been called for.

8. Counsel further submits that as per the information provided by his client that delay of trial is going on due to the action of the petitioner.

9. Upon going through the report, it transpires to this Court that the evidence could not be completed due to the reason that the co-accused has not presented himself in the court and his bail bond has been cancelled and subsequently on the next day, the Court has issued process under section 82 of the Cr.P.C. before the accused, namely, Braj Bhushan Singh.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17776 of 2024(3) dt.03-05-2024 3/3

10. It transpires to this court that the accused, namely, Shashi Bhushan Singh and Braj Bhushan Singh are full brothers and with a view to make delay, he has instructed his brother not to appear due to which his bail bond has been cancelled.

11. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U T