Bijli Saw @ Sumant Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36392 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2012 Thana- BARH District- Patna ====================================================== Bijli Saw @ Sumant Kumar, aged about 38 years, Male, Son of Late Shiv Shankar Saw, Resident of Village- Manjhila Bigha, P.S. - Pandarak, District - Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Aditya Shankar, Advocate Mr.Sanchay Srivastava, Advocate Mr.Ravi Prakash, Advocate Mr.Sovran Suman, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.A.G.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 25-03-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Barh P.S. Case No. 44 of 2012 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302 AND 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

By order dated 04.12.2019, the bail application of the petitioner was rejected with a direction to the trial court to conclude the trial within one year. By order dated 30.01.2021, report was called for and report shows that the charge has been framed against the petitioner on 17.02.2021 and summon has been issued on 18.02.2021 for witnesses.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36392 of 2020(6) dt.25-03-2021 2/2 Considering this fact, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial for which he is directed to send a list of witness fixing specific date for each witness for their examination along with copy of this order to the concerned Superintendent of Police, who is directed to ensure the attendance of witnesses on that date fixed by the trial court so that there is no further delay in the trial. day to day basis so that there is no further delay in the trial.

Both parties are agreed to cooperate in the trial. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the above named petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above named petitioner in connection with Barh P.S. Case No.44 of 2017 pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barh is hereby rejected. However, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial within six months. If the trial is not concluded within six months, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Nasimul/- U T