Patna High CourtCR. MISC./32118/2018rejected

Bhutani Murmu @ Bhuthni Murmu v. The State Of Bihar

2018-06-20Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.32118 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -249 Year- 2015 Thana -FALKAHA District- KATIHAR ====================================================== BHUTANI MURMU @ BHUTHNI MURMU Son of Lakhan Murmu Resident of Village- Mohammad Nagar Kauwakol, Police Station- Falka, District- Katihar.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vikram Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 20-06-2018 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner wants to renew his prayer for bail which was earlier rejected by orders dated 17.02.2016 and 22.02.2017 passed in Cr Misc. Nos. 56310 of 2015 and 8301 of 2017, on the ground that the petitioner is suffering in custody since 09.10.2015, the petitioner is an old man aged about 71 years, the presence of the informant appears doubtful and other witnesses are hear-say, the dead body was recovered on 13.10.2015 which was not in a position to identify, there is no specific allegation against the petitioner and as such he deserves sympathetic consideration.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32118 of 2018 (2) dt.20-06-2018 2/2 The learned A.P.P. submits that the petitioner and others have killed the wife of the informant brutally and further hide the dead body after keeping the same in gunny bag. In the facts and circumstances stated above, at present finding no good ground for reconsideration of prayer for bail, again prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected in connection with Sessions Trial No. 46 of 2016 arising out of Falka P.S. Case No. 249 of 2015 pending in the court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Katihar.

However, the learned trial court is again directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same as early as possible preferably within four months, failing which the petitioner, if at no fault, may renew his prayer for bail.

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