← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./34712/2020bail rejected

Shiv Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2021-02-03Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34712 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2019 Thana- KHODAWANDPUR District- Begusarai ====================================================== Shiv Kumar, S/o Ram Charitar Mahton, R/o Village- Khodawandpur, P.S.- Khodawandpur, P.S.- Khodawandpur, District- Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nityanand, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 03-02-2021 As prayed for, let the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within four weeks of starting of the Court proceeding in physical mode.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. appearing for the State.

The petitioner is accused in connection with Sessions Trial No. 410 of 2020 arising out of Khodawandpur P.S. Case No. 51 of 2019, registered under Sections 341, 307, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and later on, Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code has been added, pending in the court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Begusarai.

The prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34712 of 2020(2) dt.03-02-2021 2/2 rejected on merit by this Court vide order dated 04.03.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 70942 of 2019, taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner, Shiv Kumar and his brother, Ram Dudin Mahto, to shot fire at the deceased, husband of the informant.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 07.06.2019 and the trial of the petitioner has not been concluded as yet.

Since the prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this court on merit taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner, I find no ground to reconsider the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T