← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./47294/2016rejected

Sushant Kumar Das @ Sushant Kr. Das @ Chhotan @ Sushan Kumar Das @ Ghotan v. The State Of Bihar

2016-11-09Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.47294 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -154 Year- 2015 Thana -AJAMNAGAR District- KATIHAR ====================================================== Sushant Kumar Das @ Sushant Kr. Das @ Chhotan @ Sushan Kumar Das @ Ghotan son of Late Vinay Kumar Das @ Vinay Das, resident of VillageMukuria, P.S. Azamnagar, District- Katihar. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Qumrul Hoda For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Murlidhar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 09-11-2016 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 order dated 11.04.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 6523 of 2016 on the ground that the petitioner is suffering in custody since 09.11.2015, in near future the trial is not likely to be concluded as up till now only three prosecution witnesses have been examined, out of which two have turned hostile.

The learned A.P.P. opposes prayer for bail by submitting that during investigation also the witnesses have supported the allegation.

In the facts and circumstances as stated above, finding

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47294 of 2016 (2) dt.09-11-2016 2/2 no good ground for reconsideration of prayer for bail, again prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected in connection with Sessions Trial No. 138 of 2016 arising out of Azamnagar (Salmari O.P.) P.S. Case No. 154 of 2015 pending in the court of the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-II, Katihar. However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order after taking the same on the priority basis.

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