Munna Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8059 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2016 Thana- FATUA District- Patna ====================================================== Munna Singh, Son of Chandeshwar Prasad @ Chandeshwar Prasad Singh, Resident of Village- Fatepur, P.S.- Raghopur, District- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Aditya Shankar, Advocate For the informant :
Mr. Y.V. Giri, Sr. Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 07-04-2021 Heard the parties.
Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 307, 427, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.
Informant who is the wife of the deceased has alleged that petitioner along with FIR named accused and 8-10 unknown persons fired upon his husband. It has been further alleged that petitioner and one Babloo Singh dragged out her husband from his vehicle and pulled down him on the ground and thereafter, all accused fired upon him as a result of which he died. The reason for killing is political rivalry and old enmity. Earlier also, petitioner had moved this Court for grant of regular bail which was rejected vide Annexue 1.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8059 of 2021(3) dt.07-04-2021 2/2 Vide order dated 24.02.2021 report was called for from the court concerned as with regard to the stage of trial. Report of the trial court has been received, which is kept at Flag R, extract of which is reproduced hereinbelow:- Most humbly and respectfully, I have to submit that this record is presently going on for prosecution evidence. Till date out of 16 chargesheet witness 5 witness including informant has been examined. 11 including the investigating officer and Medical Officer remain to be examined. In this case witness were regularly appearing before Covid-19 lockdown. Now, prosecution has assured this Court to produce witness regularly.
As such this trial will be concluded now within maximum period of 3 months. In this regard I have to submit that due to Covid-19 the witness were not turning up so the trial could not be completed till now. In view of the above, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and conclude the same at the earliest. (S. Kumar, J) Rajiv/- U T