Karu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.55226 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -74 Year- 2018 Thana -GOVINDPUR District- NAWADA ======================================================

1. Karu Singh S/o Bhagirath Singh, R/o Vill.- Bhawanpur, P.S.- Govindpur, Distt.- Nawadah (Bihar).

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madan Prasad Singh No-2 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nityanand Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 01-11-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the informant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner seeks bail in Govindpur P.S. Case No. 74/2018, instituted for the offences under Sections 341, 323 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

It is alleged in the written report that on 02.04.2018 at about 3.30 A.M., son of informant had gone for urination. In the meantime due to sudden storm, his son entered into flour mill of petitioner. Then petitioner after making allegation of Chor-Chor started assaulting his son with rod due to which he sustained injury. Thereafter, he was brought to P.H.C., Govindpur in unconscious condition for treatment.

Injury report is available in case diary, wherein

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55226 of 2018 (3) dt.01-11-2018 2/2 doctor has found as many as five injuries on the person of injured, out of which two injuries, i.e. injury nos. 4 and 5 are grievous in nature, which are fracture of both elbows and skull bone etc. The other injuries are found to be simple in nature. In the injury report, age of the boy has been mentioned as 12 years. From the written report itself, it appears that this petitioner has brutally assaulted the son of informant. In view of such, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, prayer for bail of petitioner is rejected.

The court below is directed to expedite the trial. Petitioner is given liberty to renew the prayer for bail after six months in the event no substantive progress is made in trial.

(Sanjay Priya, J.) Rakhi U T