Naitik Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62879 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-396 Year-2021 Thana- ARA NAGAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== NAITIK SINGH Son of Harendra Kumar Singh @ Harendra Singh Resident of Village-Majhawan (Devnagar), Police Station-Ara (T), District-Bhojpur, Ara.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shankar Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shyameshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 18-10-2022 Let the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Ara Town P.S. Case No. 396 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per prosecution case, accusation against the petitioner is that he fired upon the informant's son due to which victim sustained injury at his right shoulder and co-accused Ritik Singh also fired upon the informant's son which hit the temple of the informant'son due to which informant's son died. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62879 of 2021(3) dt.18-10-2022 2/2 petitioner is in custody since 08.06.2021. Petitioner bears one criminal antecedent. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Entire allegation against the petitioner is false and baseless. Informant is not an eye witness to the alleged occurrence.

The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. He has submitted that there is specific allegation against the petitioner and same is corroborated and supported by the postmortem report. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation against the petitioner coupled with postmortem report and materials available on record, I am not inclined to grant bail to the present petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the present petitioner stands rejected. However, learned trial court is directed to conclude the trial within nine months if there is no substantial progress in trial within aforesaid period the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) amitkr/- U T