Nilu Singh @ Arvind Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50918 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2001 Thana- ANTI District- Gaya ====================================================== Nilu Singh @ Arvind Sharma S/O Late Lalan Prasad Singh R/O VillageKorap, Ps. Anti, Dist. Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shivendra Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 30-10-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case instituted for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The allegation against the petitioner along with others is of firing upon the son of the informant leading to his death.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. He submitted that informant is not eyewitness of the alleged occurrence. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail petition and he is languishing in judicial custody since 30.03.2023.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50918 of 2023(4) dt.30-10-2023 2/2 application for bail and submitted that petitioner is named in the FIR. He submitted that several witnesses have supported the prosecution case in respect of seeing the petitioner that he was running from the place of occurrence. As per postmortem report, it appears that the death is caused by fire-arms injury, which corroborates the prosecution case. During investigation several witnesses have also supported the prosecution case.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

7. From the perusal of the status report of the trial Court, which is mark at "Flag A", it appears that the trial is likely to be concluded within six months.

8. The learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within its stipulated time, which is mentioned in its report failing which, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Arish/- U T