← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./65241/2021bail rejected

Abu Hayat @ Md. Abu Hayat v. The State Of Bihar

2022-10-12Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65241 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2019 Thana- ANGARH District- Purnia ====================================================== Abu Hayat @ Md. Abu Hayat Son of Alimuddin Resident of Village - Balua Gostara, P.S.- Routa, District - Purnea.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vikram Dev Singh, Adv. with Mr. Sudish Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Kumar Dhananjay Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Murli Dhar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 12-10-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to inadvertence, the date of custody as mentioned in paragraph 10 has wrongly typed as 21.08.2021. The actual date is otherwise, he seeks permission to correct the same.

Permission is hereby granted. He is directed to correct the defect in course of the day.

Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within two weeks from today.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Angarh P.S. Case No. 14 of 2019 lodged under Sections 302/ 34 of the I.P.C.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65241 of 2021(3) dt.12-10-2022 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail of the present petitioner was earlier rejected on 11.06.2020, report was called for and it has been intimated in the report that commitment has been made in this case.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that petitioner is in custody since 21.08.2019. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at present but he may renew his prayer for bail one year after date of framing of charge. The Court is directed to expedite the trial as early as possible.

With this observation, the bail application stands rejected.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) prakashmani/- U T