Naga @ Khurshid @ Khurhid Sheikh @ Khalid v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.71981 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-304 Year-2017 Thana- PIRO District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Naga Khurshid @ Khurshid Sheikh @ Khalid, Son of Late Samshu Sheikh, Resident of Village- Piro, Ward No.13, P.S.- Piro, District- Bhojpur at Ara. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rama Kant Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sri Abhay Kumar - 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-01-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The petitioner is languishing in custody since 14.11.2017 in connection with Piro P.S. Case No.304 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Prosecution case as per the ferdbeyan of Md. Vaijul Khan recorded by S.I. Piro P.S. is to the effect that on 03.11.2013 at about 7 A.M., the son-in-law of the informant, Naga Khurshid, the petitioner and co-accused Babloo Sheikh took the son of the informant namely, Md. Nurain Khan to bamboo orchard where co-accused Wahi Khan Kadwari Khan and Tanwir Khan were preesent from before. There they had a hot exchange with the son of the informant, whereupon, the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.71981 of 2018(4) dt.24-01-2019 2/2 petitioner gave a blow by a sword on the neck of son of the informant and thereafter, co-accused Babloo Singh took the sword from the petitioner and he also gave a blow on her neck, as a rescue, the neck got completely cut and detached from the body and ultimately, the son of the informant died. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that due to some earlier personal dispute, the accusation has been levelled. As per the FIR, the informant is not the eye witness to the occurrence and the victim was having a criminal antecedent. It is further submitted that no motive behind the alleged occurrence has been given in the F.I.R. Learned APP however, submits that the accusation is levelled against the petitioner which is being corroborated with the medical opinion.

Considering the nature of accusation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Let the trial Court expedite the trial arising out of Piro P.S. Case No.304 of 2017 and the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail if the trial is not concluded within a year.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) sanjeev/- U T