Patna High CourtCR. MISC./44692/2016rejected

Lal Kanhiya Ram v. The State Of Bihar

2016-11-29Mr. Justice Hemant Kumar Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.44692 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -109 Year- 2015 Thana -KARPI District- JEHANABAD ====================================================== Lal Kanhiya Ram, S/o Faguni Ram, Resident of Village- Gadopur, P.S.- Karpi, District- Arwal.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar -3 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 29-11-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 307 and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code.

There is specific allegation against the petitioner and one co-accused that they cut the neck of the injured. The learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, Jehanabad has sent his report mentioning this fact that charge against the petitioner was framed on 20.07.2016 and process to procure the attendance of prosecution witnesses have already been issued. The learned trial court has sought nine months time for conclusion of trial of the petitioner vide his letter no. 242/16 dated 08.11.2016.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44692 of 2016 (4) dt.29-11-2016 2/2 Therefore, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail and hence, his prayer for bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 335 of 2016/69 of 2016 arising out of Karpi P.S. Case No. 109 of 2015 pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge-V, Jehanabad stands rejected. However, it is made clear that if the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within the above stated period as sought by the learned trial court itself, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the trial court itself. (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) SHAHZAD/- U T