Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37590/2024bail rejected

Sandeep Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

2024-08-08Mr. Justice Chandra Prakash Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37590 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-362 Year-2022 Thana- CHENARI District- Rohtas ====================================================== SANDEEP PASWAN SON OF HARI CHARAN PASWAN @ BHADURI PASWAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - GANESHPUR, P.S. - CHENARI, DISTRICT - ROHTAS AT SASARAM ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Babu Nandan Prasad, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP Mr. Umanath Mishra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Chenari P.S Case No. 362 of 2022 dated 06.12.2022 registered for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is alleged to have committed murder of the minor son of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. As per Letter No. 14 dated

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37590 of 2024(3) dt.08-08-2024 2/2 12.07.2024, all the five charge-sheeted prosecution witnesses have been examined along with M.O. and I.O. of the case respectively. Further, the trial of this case is expected to conclude within a period of three months. The petitioner has antecedent of no criminal case as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 14.12.2022.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner by submitting that there is specific allegation against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the deceased was aged about 5 years.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner abovenamed on bail.

7. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.

8. The application stands rejected.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) shivam/- U T