Amit Kumar @ Amit v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58032 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-192 Year-2019 Thana- BEUR District- Patna ====================================================== AMIT KUMAR @ AMIT Son of Dr. Ashok Kumar Resident of Village - Daswhratha, Bypass, P.S.- Beur, Distt.- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. P.K. Shahi, Sr. Advocate Mr. Rakesh Kumar For the State :

Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 15-12-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is an accused in connection with Beur P.S. Case No. 192 of 2019 registered under Sections 304(B), 307 and 34 of the I.P.C. pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Patna.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that earlier prayer of the petitioner for bail was rejected by this Court twice vide Cr. Misc. No. 76474 of 2019 on 05.03.2020 and Cr. Misc. No. 33720 of 2020 on 17.03.2021. In the instant case, charge has already been framed on 06.12.2021. Further he submits that petitioner is in custody since 30.05.2019. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58032 of 2021(5) dt.15-12-2021 2/2 vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner by contending that earlier prayer of the petitioner for grant of regular bail was twice rejected by the Court on merit vide Cr Misc. No. 76474 of 2019 on 05.03.2020 and Cr. Misc. No. 33720 of 2020 on 17.03.2021.

A report was called for from the court below regarding the present stage of trial, which has been received and kept at Flag- "X". In the report, it is mentioned that in the instant case, there are two accused; one is petitioner and another his father, who is on bail and his non-appearance is creating hindrance in progress of the trial.

Having considered the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner is again rejected. Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of six months from the date of framing of charge. shailendra/- (Arvind Srivastava, J) U T