Artin Muryare @ Artim Mureyare @ Artim Muryari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.19638 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -136 Year- 2010 Thana -BHARGAWAN District- ARRARIA ====================================================== Artin Muryare @ Artim Mureyare @ Artim Muryari, Son of Late Ganni Mureyari @ Mannu Mureyari, Resident of Village - Raghunathpur (South), P.S. - Bhargama, District - Araria.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 05/ 25-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has renewed the prayer for bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 324 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, wherein, subsequently Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was also added.

It is alleged that in the background of land dispute, on the order of Bhutto Muryari, Prakash Muryari caused injury with farsa on the head of the wife of the informant, Rajesh

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19638 of 2016 (5) dt.25-04-2018 Muryari caused injury with arrow and when the brother of the informant, Gayanand Sharma, came to rescue, then Yoganand Muriyari caused injury with spear on the abdomen and this petitioner also caused injury with farsa on the hand, subsequently Gayanand Sharma succumbed to the injuries.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner the accusation against the petitioner is of causing injury on the hand. The petitioner is languishing in custody since four and half years and it appears that the trial is not likely to be concluded in near future.

Considering the fact that earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 09.01.2015 but it appears that neither the prosecution nor the learned Court below made any serious effort to conclude the trial and the fact that in the earlier order, liberty was given to the petitioner to renew the prayer for bail if the trial is not concluded within a period of one year, let the above named petitioner be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Araria in connection with Sessions Trial No. 125 of 2016 arising out of Bhargama P.S. Case No. 136 of 2010.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19638 of 2016 (5) dt.25-04-2018 However, the learned trial Court will be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner, if he defaults for two consecutive occasions during trial.

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