Ram Ratan Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 48160 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -103 Year- 2001 Thana -MOKAMA District- PATNA ====================================================== Ram Ratan Singh Son of Late Parmeshwari Singh resident of VillageMoldiar Tola, P.S.- Mokama, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.
===================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL ORDER 2.
14.01.2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pranav Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State. This is the second attempt of the petitioner as earlier Cr. Misc. No. 27769 of 2014 filed by him was dismissed on the ground that the antecedent of the petitioner had not been correctly stated in paragraph no. 3 of the application. The petitioner seeks bail in Mokama P.S. Case No. 103 of 2001 dated 08.07.2001 instituted under Sections 147/148/149/302 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though there is allegation of firing on the deceased which hit him in the parietal region but the same allegation is also against Nirjesh Singh @ Naga Singh and he has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench on 21.03.2012 in Cr. Misc. No. 1217 of 2012. It is further submitted that the petitioner being
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48160 of 2014 (2) dt.14-01-2015 2/2 an old man is in custody since 15.03.2014.
Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. It is submitted that there is direct allegation against the said Nirjesh Singh @ Naga Singh and the petitioner of firing hitting on the parietal region and there have been two facial injuries found on the deceased. It is further submitted that the bail of Nirjesh Singh @ Naga Singh was granted in the third attempt and from the order it is apparent that he was in custody for over two years whereas petitioner has only completed about 10 months in custody.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed. However, the Court below shall expedite the trial and conclude the same within nine months. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar U T