Gholta Mandal @ Dhiraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.45845 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -28 Year- 2015 Thana -KASIMBAZAR District- MUNGER ====================================================== Gholta Mandal @ Dhiraj Kumar Son of Balmiki Mandal Resident of Village/Muhalla-Maksaspur Kaliasthan, Police Station-Kasim Bazar, District-Munger .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjiv Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmanand Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 08-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is in custody in connection with Kasimbazar P.S.Case No. 28/2015 for offences punishable under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and the allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith one other fired upon the husband of the informant leading to his death. The name of the assailants is mentioned in the First Information Report and it is in consideration of the position that the prayer for bail made by the petitioner was rejected by this Court on 1.2.2016 in Cr.Misc.No. 57942/2015. The prayer has been renewed. In between the case has been committed and the trial court has informed that the framing of charge is delayed on account of absence of some of the accused persons. It is further mentioned that the trial would be concluded within 3 to 4 months of the framing of the charge.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45845 of 2016 (3) dt.08-03-2017 Learned counsel for the petitioner has invited attention of this Court to the deposition of the informant to submit that she has been declared hostile.
Learned counsel for the State has submitted that there are two other eye witnesses who are yet to be examined. In the circumstances, I am not persuaded to allow the prayer of the petitioner. This application is, accordingly, dismissed.
Let the trial be expedited and concluded preferably within six months from the date of framing of charge. (Jyoti Saran, J) Surendra/- U