Sujit Singh @ Sujeet Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

(FROM RESIDENTIAL OFFICE VIA VIDEO APPLICATION) CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27913 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-483 Year-2018 Thana- UDWANTNAGAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== SUJIT SINGH @ SUJEET KUMAR SINGH S/o Suresh Singh Resident of Village-Tetariya, Police Station-Udwantnagar, District-Bhojpur. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravi Bhardwaj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nagendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 21-10-2020 Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove all the defects pointed out by Stamp Reporter within four weeks after start of normal functioning of the Court. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Nagendra Prasad, learned APP for the State.

The petitioner in the present case is seeking regular bail in connection with Udwantnagar P.S.Case No.483 of 2018 registered for the offence under Sections 302 and 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

This is the second attempt of the petitioner. Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected after noticing that the allegation against the petitioner is that of committing overt act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27913 of 2020(2) dt.21-10-2020 2/3 in the F.I.R. there are general and omnibus allegations. In course of argument this Court has been informed that trial in this case has already begun and out of six charge-sheet witnesses, three have been examined during pre-covid-19 period, but thereafter the trial could not be concluded due to intervening circumstances i.e. the outbreak of covid-19 pandemic. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner at this stage and it is submitted that this Court had recorded there being specific allegation against the petitioner only after noticing that in the FIR there is an allegation that this petitioner had aimed at the deceased and had fired on him.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case since this Court has been informed that out of six chargesheet witnesses, three have already been examined and the trial is going on, at this stage this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of regular bail to the petitioner.

Let the trial court proceed with the trial as the court has now started opening, this Court would direct that at the earliest opportunity the court will fix a date in the matter and would take up the evidence of remaining witnesses if physical court is functioning and it is expected that no unnecessary

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27913 of 2020(2) dt.21-10-2020 3/3 adjournment be granted unless it becomes absolutely necessary. Let the trial be expedited and the same be concluded preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

This application stands disposed of accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) arvind/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.