Jitendra Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30281 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-321 Year-2021 Thana- EKMA District- Saran ====================================================== JITENDRA SAH Son of Santosh Sah @ Lutan Sah Resident of village - Badheya Tola, Bhuwarpur, P.S. - Ekma, Distt. - Saran at Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vijay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nagendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 12-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Ekma P.S. Case No. 321 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 326 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per prosecution case, petitioner is said to have assaulted the informant by means fahsul (an weapon used for cutting vegetable) causing injury on her hand, finger and head.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 08.08.2021 and bears no criminal antecedent. He further submits that petitioner has not intention to kill his wife and the occurrence has taken place at the spur of moment. Petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30281 of 2023(6) dt.12-02-2024 2/2 offence as alleged against him in F.I.R.

5. The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner by submitting that there is direct allegation of assaulting the informant against the petitioner by means of sharp cutting weapon and the same is corroborated by the injury report as mentioned in para 26 of the case diary.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner coupled with injury report as well as material available on record, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

7. However, the learned trial court is directed to conclude the trial within six months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order to the court concerned. If the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) alok/- U T