Patna High CourtCR. MISC./36836/2021rejected

Binod Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2022-07-06Mr. Justice Ashwani Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36836 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2019 Thana- BUNIYAD GANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== Binod Kumar Son of Jawahar Tanti @ Jawahar Prasad Resident of MohallaShiv Charan Lane, Surya Pokhar Road, P.S.- Buniyadganj, District- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar Gautam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-07-2022 Heard Mr. Manish Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr. Mrityunjay Kumar Gautam, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail in connection with Buniyadganj P.S. Case No. 01 of 2019 registered under Section 302 and 201 of Indian Penal Code. The prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 20.11.2019 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 42164 of 2019 considering that the allegation against the petitioner is that he strangulated his wife by tightening rope around her neck and the post-mortem report corroborated the ocular version. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that by now the petitioner has remained in custody for over three years and only one witness has been examined during trial.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36836 of 2021(3) dt.06-07-2022 2/2 Be that as it may, considering the gravity of the offence and the role allegedly played by the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner for the present. The prayer for bail is rejected.

The court below (Additional Sessions Judge-III, Gaya) is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably within nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order.

In case, the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period of nine months, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the court below itself. (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Pradeep-Pooja/- U T