Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37073/2015dismissed

Narendra Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2015-12-16Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.37073 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -186 Year- 2014 Thana -NAWADA District- NAWADA ======================================================

1. Narendra Singh, Son of Late Faudar Singh, Resident of Village- Chhapra, P.S.- Rajauli, District- Nawadah.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vindhyachal Singh, & Mr. Vipin Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madhuranand Jha (App) For the Informant : Mr. S. A. Hussain. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 16-12-2015 Heard Sri Vindhyachal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri S. A. Hussain, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.P.P. for the State.

Prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected vide order dated 17.12.2014 vide Criminal Misc. No. 38855 of 2014.

Sri Vindhyachal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner confessed his guilt on 18.04.2014 as per paragraph 81 of the case diary. Mokhtar Ansari also confessed his guilt on 19.04.2014 which is incorporated in paragraph 111 of the case diary and on his confession the dead body was recovered from a thick forest on 22.04.2014 as

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37073 of 2015 (3) dt.16-12-2015 incorporated in paragraph 153 of the case diary. It is submitted that there is no material to show the involvement of the petitioner.

From perusal of the record it appears that after considering all the facts prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected earlier. I do not find any fresh ground to re-consider the prayer for bail of the petitioner in connection with Nawadah Town P.S. Case No. 186 of 2014 pending in the court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawada. It is accordingly rejected. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same holding the trial on day to day basis within nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. If the trial is not concluded within the time aforesaid, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court below forthwith.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Amin/- U