Patna High CourtCR. MISC./38835/2016rejected

Satyadeo Ram v. The State Of Bihar

2016-10-26Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.38835 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -96 Year- 2013 Thana -GUTHNI District- SIWAN ======================================================

1. Satyadeo Ram Son of Late Rajbanshi Ram Resident of village - Kishunpali, P.O. Kishunpali, P.S. Daraule, District Siwan ... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jagjit Roshan For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 26-10-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State.

The petitioner wants to renew his prayer of bail, which was earlier rejected vide order dated 11.05.2016 passed in Cri. Misc. No. 13097 of 2016, on the ground that the petitioner is suffering in custody since 12.10.2015, due to political rivalry the petitioner has been implicated. The petitioner is sitting MLA, there is case and counter case, some of the independent witnesses have not supported the prosecution version and the post mortem report is not consistent with the prosecution version. The petitioner was in a meeting at village Madhiyari which is 20 kilometer meter away from the place of occurrence, which has come vide paragraph 236, 237 and 238 of the case diary. Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer of bail by

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38835 of 2016 (3) dt.26-10-2016 2/2 submitting that the petitioner is the assailant and he shot Raj Narayan Singh @ Raju Singh the son of the informant twice, resulting, he fell down thereafter and succumbed to the injuries. In the facts and circumstances stated above, finding no good ground for reconsideration of prayer of bail, again prayer of bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

However, considering the period of detention the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, failing which the petitioner, if at no fault, may renew his prayer for bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) siddharth/-avin U T