Sagir Mian v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.9411 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-84 Year-2016 Thana- BELAGANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== Sagir Mian, son of Abdul Sattar, Resident of Village- Dakara, P.S. Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Smt. Pronati Singh (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 21-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner wants to renew the prayer of bail, which was earlier twice rejected vide order dated 15.09.2016 and 19.07.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. 31504 of 2016 and Cr. Misc. No. 22554 of 2017, on the ground that the petitioner is suffering in custody since 03.06.2016, there was no intention to commit murder, during post mortem only one injury has been found, as a matter of fact firing was made on Neelgay, but it hit the deceased and she died, the trial has not been concluded as per direction of this court. Up till now only two prosecution witnesses have been examined and in near future the trial is not likely to be concluded and, as such, the petitioner deserves

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9411 of 2018(2) dt.21-02-2018 2/2 sympathetic consideration.

The learned A.P.P. fairly submits that trial has not been concluded within the time given by this Court. In the facts and circumstances stated above, petitioner is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.D.J.-VII, Gaya, in connection with Sessions Trial No. 29/2017/524/2016 arising out of Belaganj P.S. Case No. 84 of 2016, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Rajiv/- U T