Ravi Patel And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.17279 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -127 Year- 2015 Thana -BOCHHA District- MUZAFFARPUR ======================================================

1. Ravi Patel Son of Ram Prasad Patel resident of Village- Tekwa Farm Kanchanpur P.S. Bodh Gaya District- Gaya.

2. Rakesh Patel Son of Suresh Patel Resident of Village- Rajapur Panchhati P.S. Bodh Gaya, District- Gaya.

.... .... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Kishore Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 23-06-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. representing the State.

The petitioners seek bail in connection with Bochahan P.S. Case No. 127 of 2015 registered for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegedly, by unknown miscreants Kameshwar Kahar, the father of the informant, was killed and it is stated that in the night, theft was committed in two houses and at the time of return, the thieves committed murder of the father of the informant. During investigation, the petitioners and co-accused were apprehended and they confessed their guilt and further, some theft articles were recovered and further, on the basis of disclosure and identification of the petitioner, Ravi Patel, the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17279 of 2016 (3) dt.23-06-2016 2/2 knife used in the alleged crime was also recovered. Submission is of false implication and that besides suspicion, there is nothing against the petitioners, there is no witness of actual killing and the petitioners without any fault are suffering in custody since 09.08.2015.

Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer of bail by submitting that there is sufficient materials against the petitioners and further, the trial is going on and which is likely to be concluded in near future.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the materials available against the petitioners, at present, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail and accordingly, their such prayer stands rejected in connection with Sessions Trial No. 39 of 2016 arising out of Bochahan P.S. Case No. 127 of 2015 pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur.

However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same preferably within six months after taking the same on priority basis.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) ajaypd./- U T