Vinay Pathak v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

(FROM RESIDENTIAL OFFICE VIA VIDEO APPLICATION) CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5561 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-515 Year-2018 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Vinay Pathak Son Of Sri Nityanand Pathak Resident Of Village -CHUHARI, Pathak Tola, P.S.-CHANPATIA, District-West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Umesh Chandra Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Gulnar Begum, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 15-04-2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove all the defects as pointed out by office within four weeks after start of normal functioning of the Court. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner, in the present case, is seeking regular bail in connection with Session Trial No. 322 of 2019 arising out of Chanpatia P.S. Case No. 515 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Section 341, 342, 323, 307, 387, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 302/120B was subsequently added, and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge, West Champaran, Bettiah. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the first information report the petitioner is alleged to have shot

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5561 of 2021(2) dt.15-04-2021 2/2 at the informant's father while he was on way with the informant.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case wherein learned counsel for the informant has informed this Court that out of eight prosecution witnesses, seven witnesses have already been examined in course of trial and the trial is on the verge of conclusion, this Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

Prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is, thus, refused.

Let the trial be expedited and all endeavours be made to conclude the same preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. This application stands disposed off accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.