Ranjit Kumar Singh @ Ranjit Singh @ Praveen Singh @ Satish Kumar @ Gorakh Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.1829 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -111 Year- 2013 Thana -NAYAGAON District- SARAN ======================================================

1. Ranjit Kumar Singh @ Ranjit Singh @ Praveen Singh @ Satish Kumar @ Gorakh Singh, Son of Nagmani Singh, resident of Village Chaturpur, P.S. Nayagaon, District- Chapra (Saran).

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kamlesh Prasad Yadav For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Rajendra Prasad Nat ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 31-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Earlier, the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court taking note of allegation leveled against the petitioner but this bail petition is filed on behalf of the petitioner on the ground that having more or less, similar allegation, several co-accused have already been enlarged on bail and petitioner is languishing in jail custody for near about four years. The learned trial court has reported that up till now 19 prosecution witnesses including victim, father of the victim and I.O have already been examined and the case is pending for receipt of materials exhibits which have been called for by the court on

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1829 of 2018 (3) dt.31-01-2018 2/2 the prayer of prosecution from the court of Additional District Judge 13th Surat, Gujrat as well as Nayagaon Police Station. In view of the aforesaid facts, again I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail and, accordingly, his prayer for bail in connection with Nayagaon P.S.Case No. 111 of 2013, Session trial no. 404 of 2015, pending in the court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra stands rejected However, it is made clear that if the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within six months from the date of receipt/ production of copy of this order, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the trial court itself. (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) N.K/- U