Chandan Kumar @ Amit Raj v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.55484 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -82 Year- 2016 Thana -GIRIYAK District- NALANDA (BIHARSHARIFF) ====================================================== Chandan Kumar @ Amit Raj, Son of Sanjay yadav, Resident of Village:- Hasanpur, P.S:-Giriyak, District:-Nalanda at Biharsharif. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 30-01-2017 The application is for grant of regular bail in connection with S.Tr. No. 522 of 2016, arising out of Giriyak P.S. Case No. 82 of 2016, G.R. No. 1139 of 2016 registered for offences under sections 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that except suspicion, there is nothing against the petitioner and later on, on the confessional statement of the co-accused, the petitioner's name has transpired in this case. It has further been submitted that the manner of occurrence as alleged in the first information report or during the course of investigation has not been corroborated by the post mortem report. The petitioner is in custody since 29.03.2016.

Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55484 of 2016 (3) dt.30-01-2017 2/2 as the informant.

Learned counsel for the informant submits that on the basis of confessional statement, the dead body of the victim was recovered and now the trial has been initiated and one witness has already been examined and rest witnesses except the I.O. and the Doctor, will be examined within a period of six months. Having heard both sides. In view of the above fact, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. However, the court below is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. If the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period, the petitioner will have liberty to move for bail before the court concerned, who will pass an order without being prejudiced by this order. With the above observation, this petition is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Mahesh/- U T