Nirmal Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52236 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-64 Year-2018 Thana- SURYAPUR District- Rohtas ====================================================== NIRMAL KUMAR SINGH Son of Late Mudrika Singh Resident of Village - Sujanpur, P.S.- Dinara, District- Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Om Prakash Upadhyay For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Umesh Lal Verma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-11-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Surajpura P.S. Case No. 64 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 504, 307, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.

Informant has alleged in his written complaint that on 02.06.2018 at 7.30 PM her husband Rahim Khan received a call on his mobile of co-accused Dablu Yadav @ Mukhia and thereafter her husband informed her that Dablu Yadav @ Mukhia is calling him at the door of Nazir Yadav, subsequently at 9.30 PM she was informed by one Babudhan Yadav that her husband has sustained gun shot injury in front of the house of Nazir Yadav and when she went there, she found her husband in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52236 of 2019(4) dt.20-11-2019 2/2 an injured condition and disclosed that Dablu Yadav @ Mukhia called him and took him to the Dalan of Nazir Yadav and due to demand of loan amount by him Nirmal Kumar Singh (petitioner) became angry and fired upon him causing firearm injury on chest.

Report was called for from the trial court in which it has been stated that charges has already been framed against the petitioner.

Considering the nature of allegation against petitioner, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly the prayer for bail is rejected. However, the trial court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of order passed by this Court. Petitioner is granted liberty to renew his prayer for bail, if trial is not concluded within six months.

(S. Kumar, J) veena/- U T