Patna High CourtCR. MISC./14249/2016rejected

Fekan Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

2016-06-29Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.14249 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -34 Year- 2015 Thana -SHAKURABAD District- JEHANABAD ======================================================

1. Fekan Manjhi Son of Late Ram Dahin Manjhi resident of village - Utrapatti, Police Station - Shakurabad in the district of Jehanabad .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Singh Shastri Jee (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 29-06-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offences punishable under sections 323, 324, 326, 308, 302 and 34 of the I.P.C and section 3⁄4 of W.P. Act.

Specific allegation against the petitioner is that when Vijay Mistry, the father of the informant, fell down due to assault committed by the petitioner and Sarvan Manjhi, the petitioner started assaulting Vijay Mistry with khanti on his head, face and neck causing his death.

Submission is of false implication and that in this case Sarvan Manjhi has already been allowed bail, the petitioner is suffering in custody since 04.04.2015 and as such he also deserves

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14249 of 2016 (5) dt.29-06-2016 2/2 sympathetic consideration, to which the learned A.P.P. opposes by submitting that the petitioner is the assailant. In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, serious in nature, I am not inclined to enlarge him on bail and accordingly his such prayer stands rejected in connection with Shakurabad P.S. Case No. 34 of 2015 pending in the court of Sri Amit Kumar Shukla, J.M. 1st Class, Jehanabad.

However, considering detention of the petitioner, let the trial be expedited and concluded as early as possible preferably within a period of nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T