Bikau Bind v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.47930 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -382 Year- 2014 Thana -SASARAM NAGAR District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== Bikau Bind, son of Late Bishwa Nath Bind, resident of Village- Kadirganj, P.S.- Darigaon, District- Rohtas.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhinay Raj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 04-11-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 572/14 arising out of Sasaram (Darigaon) P.S. Case No. 382/2014 registered under Sections 341, 342 and 307 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. The prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 16.09.2014 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 30553 of 2014 with following observations:- "The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sasaram, Rohtas is directed to commit the case of the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47930 of 2015 (2) dt.04-11-2015 2 / 2 petitioner to the Court of Sessions for trial. The learned Sessions Judge, Sasaram is directed to ensure speedy trial of the case. In case, the trial of the case is not completed within nine months from the date of framing of charge, the petitioner would be entitled to renew his prayer for bail." It is contended that though the petitioner is in custody since 30th May, 2014, till date, trial of the case has not concluded. Out of the eight witnesses only seven could be examined on behalf of the prosecution during trial and the investigating officer of the case is yet to be examined. Be that as it may, since the trial is at its fag end, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the application for bail is rejected.
The trial court is directed to conclude the trial within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order failing which the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the trial court itself. (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.) Sanjeet/- U T