Amar Nath Prasad v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21817 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2022 Thana- KOPA District- Saran ====================================================== Amar Nath Prasad son of Late Baidyanath Prasad R/V- Samhota Mathia, PSKopa, Dist- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Adv with Mr. Basant Kumar Singh, Mr. Vishesh Kumar Singh and Ms. Diksha Kumari, Advocates For the State :
Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Narendra Kumar, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 06-09-2024 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though the prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected by order dated 19.05.2023 in Cr. Misc. No. 4099 of 2023 but he is renewing his prayer for bail on the ground that the petitioner is in custody for more than two years.
2. Learned counsel for the informant submits that the other co-accused persons had threatened the witnesses when the depositions were returning to home.
3. From perusal of the status report which is marked as flag 'R', it appears that two witnesses have been examined and two witnesses who conducted the postmortem are yet to be examined.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21817 of 2024(4) dt.06-09-2024 2/2
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the trial is on the verge of its conclusion, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
5. Accordingly, the prayer for bail stands rejected.
6. However, if the trial is not concluded within a period of six months, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.
7. Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the Superintendent of Police, Saran to procure the attendance of the witnesses in the Court below and the Court below is also directed not to give a date of more than ten days for marking the attendance.
8. The petitioner is also directed to co-operate in the trial.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Arish/- U T