Patna High CourtCR. MISC./48195/2021bail rejected

Bauya Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2022-04-26Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48195 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2007 Thana- NAWADA MUFFASIL District- Nawada ====================================================== BAUYA SINGH Son of Late Mishri Singh Resident of Village - Dedaur, Police Station - Muffasil, District - Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 26-04-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 12 of 2007 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 201, 364, 302, 109 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code 1860.

This is fourth attempt for grant of regular bail on behalf of the petitioner inasmuch as earlier on three occasions, the bail application of the petitioner was rejected on merit by this Court vide orders dated 9.5.2017, 21.6.2018 and 27.5.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. 20755/2017, 24063/2018 and 78577/2019 respectively. The petitioner is in custody since 2.8.2016 and the allegation against the petitioner is that he kidnapped the daughter of the informant and killed her.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48195 of 2021(3) dt.26-04-2022 2/2 This Court vide order dated 11.3.2022 had called for a report from the trial court regarding stage of trial and in pursuance thereof, the report of learned A.D.J.-I, Nawada, dated 26.3.2022 is on record and from perusal of the same, it appears that out of eleven charge sheet witnesses only one witness i.e. the Investigating Officer is yet to be examined and the trial court has given the estimated time for concluding the trial within four months.

In view of the fact that the trial is at the verge of conclusion, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner at this stage.

Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after four months if the trial does not conclude. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) S.Ali/- U T