Bablu Kumar @ Bablu Kumar Das @ Bablu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37537 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2021 Thana- PURNEA SADAR District- Purnia ====================================================== BABLU KUMAR @ BABLU KUMAR DAS @ BABLU S/O LATE BIJAL DAS R/O Village- Simlagachhi, Ward No.10, PS. Sadar (Muffasil), Dist. Purnea ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ranvijay Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Arvind Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 03-08-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-B)a/27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per prosecution case, some unknown miscreant fired upon the son of the informant, due to which he sustained injuries.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. Petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name transpired on the basis of confessional statement of himself before the police. No T.I. Parade has been done. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 19.05.2022.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37537 of 2023(3) dt.03-08-2023 2/2
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the application for bail and submitted that this is the third attempt of prayer of bail by the petitioner as such, earlier his prayer for bail has already rejected twice. He further submitted that petitioner has been made accused in two more cases of similar nature.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.
7. The trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within four months, failing which the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) arish/- U T