Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23687 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-254 Year-2019 Thana- HAJIPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== CHANDAN KUMAR, Son of Sri Krishna Kumar Rai, Resident of Village - Nawada Kala, Police Station - Ganga Bridge, Hajipur and District - Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Gajendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pramanand Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 01-12-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual court proceedings. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 393 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.

As per prosecution case, while the informant was coming by motorcycle, some miscreants tried to snatch away the motorcycle and fired on the abdomen of the informant, causing injury. FIR is against unknown.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. On the confessional statement of co-accused, he has been made accused in this case. The petitioner is in jail custody since 02.07.2019. The petitioner has ten criminal antecedents which is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23687 of 2020(4) dt.01-12-2020 2/3 mentioned in para 3 of the bail petition.

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail petition.

A report was called for vide order dated 16.10.2020 and the same has been received from the court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-XI, Vaishali at Hajipur regarding the stage of trial in Sessions Trial No. 25/2020 arising out of Hajipur Town P.S. Case No. 254/2019, which is kept at Flag 'A' in which it is stated that charge has been framed against the petitioner and the case record is pending for trial at the stage of evidence and summon as well as bailable warrant have already been issued against the charge sheeted witnesses. But till today any prosecution witness has not been examined by the prosecution before this court.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected in connection with Sessions Trial No. 25 of 2020 arising out of Hajipur Town P.S. Case No. 254/2019 pending in the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-VI, Vaishali at Hajipur.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23687 of 2020(4) dt.01-12-2020 3/3 The trial court is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of nine months from today and both the parties are directed to extend their full cooperation in early conclusion of the trial. If the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) amitkumar/- U T