Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1892/2018bail granted

Saddam Mian v. The State Of Bihar

2018-01-10Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.1892 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -431 Year- 2014 Thana -SUGAULI DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Saddam Mian, son of Ishaque Mian, resident of village-Khutiarwa, police station- Sugauli, District- East Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Murari Sharan Tiwari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nityanand (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 10-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner wants to renew the prayer of bail, which was earlier thrice rejected vide order dated 30.10.2015, 20.07.2016 and 05.07.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. 28618 of 2015, Cr. Misc. No. 28015 of 2016 and Cr. Misc. No. 25357 of 2017 respectively, on the ground that the petitioner is in custody since 20.01.2015, and in near future the trial is not likely to be concluded as up till now only one prosecution witness has been examined who has also been turned hostile. Though, there was a direction to conclude the trial within four months and the petitioner was given liberty to renew his prayer of bail. The learned A.P.P. fairly submits that the trial has not been concluded within four months.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1892 of 2018 (2) dt.10-01-2018 2/2 In the facts and circumstances stated above, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.D.J. XIth , East Champaran at Motihari, in connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No. 431 of 2014, Sessions Trial No. 633 of 2016, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Rajiv/- U T