Anuranjan Singh @ Sintu Singh @ Anuranjan Kumar Singh @ Sentu Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25459 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-100 Year-2021 Thana- UDAKISHUNGANJ DistrictMadhepura ====================================================== ANURANJAN SINGH @ SINTU SINGH @ ANURANJAN KUMAR SINGH @ SENTU SINGH S/O PRABHAKAR SINGH @ CHANDRA PRABHAKAR SINGH RESIDENT OF NAYANAGAR WARD NO 13, P.SUDAKISHUNGANJ, DISTRICT- MADHEPURA. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Bhaskar Shankar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 10-04-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail in connection with S.T no.24 of 2022, arising out of Udakishunganj P.S Case no.100 of 2021 registered under sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, it is stated that the petitioner was married to the sister of the informant. They had four issues out of the wedlock. The informant received information about his sister having been burnt by pouring petrol on her. On reaching the hospital, the informant found his sister in a burnt condition being treated in a private clinic. She was referred to another hospital but died on way.
4. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25459 of 2024(2) dt.10-04-2024 2/3 submits that the earlier applications for bail of the petitioner were rejected on two occasions, the last being by order dated 26.4.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. no.7442 of 2023 directing the learned trial Court to expedite the trial and to conclude the same within a period of four months. Further liberty was granted to the petitioner that in case the trial is not concluded within a period of four months, the petitioner will renew his prayer for bail in the learned trial Court itself which was to be considered without being prejudiced by the order of rejection by this Court. Learned Senior counsel submits that the trial not having been concluded within the time fixed, the petitioner renewed his prayer for bail which was rejected vide order dated 1.11.2023. The petitioner is in custody since 7.4.2021 and undertakes to cooperate in the trial.
5. The prayer for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for the State.
6. Having heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and having gone through the order of rejection of the application for bail of the petitioner by the learned trial Court, it transpires that after framing of charge, the case is pending for examination of prosecution witnesses. Out of 7 charge-sheet witnesses, only 3 witnesses have been examined, 4 witnesses still remain to be examined and for their appearance bailable warrants have been issued by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25459 of 2024(2) dt.10-04-2024 3/3 learned trial Court.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the F.I.R, the observation given in the last order of rejection dated 26.4.2023, the petitioner having remained in custody for 3 years since 7.4.2021 and the trial in the learned trial Court not proceeding on account of non-appearance of the prosecution witnesses for which bailable warrants have been issued by the learned trial Court, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with S.T no.24 of 2022 (arising out of Udakishunganj P.S Case no.100 of 2021) on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1st, Madhepura.
(Partha Sarthy, J) Shiv/- U T