Rup Singh @ Rupu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.43907 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -32 Year- 2012 Thana -UPHARA District- AURANGABAD ======================================================

1. Rup Singh @ Rupu Singh Son of Late Ram Briksh Sinngh resident of Village- Salempur, P.S.- Uphara, District- Aurangabad. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramashish For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Dilip Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 28-11-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner is said to have given dagger blow to the deceased causing injury on the chest and arm of the deceased. Submission on behalf of the petitioner is that the post mortem report of the deceased does not support the allegation because according to the post mortem report, the injuries were caused to deceased by hard and blunt substance and for causing the aforesaid injuries, according to the prosecution case itself, the other accused are responsible.

Regard being had to the facts and circumstances as well as submission of the parties, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail and, accordingly, his prayer for bail in

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43907 of 2016 (4) dt.28-11-2016 2/2 connection with Uphara P.S.Case No. 32 of 2012, pending in the court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Daudnagar, Aurangabad, stands rejected, at least, at this stage. The case of petitioner appears to be pending before the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Daudnagar, Aurangabad and , therefore, in the aforesaid circumstance, the concerned court is directed to commit the case of the petitioner to the court of sessions within two weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order in accordance with law and after commitment, the concerned trial court should expedite the trial of the petitioner and try to conclude the same as early as possible, preferably, within five months from the date of framing of charge. (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) N.K/- U T