Vikash Ray @ Vikash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65505 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-120 Year-2022 Thana- DORIGANJ District- Saran ====================================================== Vikash Ray @ Vikash Kumar S/o Dhaneshwar Ray R/o village- Daftarpur, P.S. - Doriganj, District - Saran at Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Naresh Dikshit, Advocate Mr. Kumar Harshvardhan, Advocate Ms. Kalpana, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 28-10-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail in connection with Doriganj P.S. Case no. 120 of 2020 registered under sections 302, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner in connivance with other named accused persons shot dead the elder son of the informant in front of him.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 30.1.2024 (Annexure-P/1) passed in Cr. Misc. no. 20311 of 2023. The petitioner, at best, is only a member of the mob. Co-accused Bablu Kumar has been enlarged on bail vide
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65505 of 2024(3) dt.28-10-2024 2/2 order dated 17.1.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. no. 35489 of 2022. The petitioner who is in custody since 2.9.2022 undertakes to cooperate in the trial.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State.
6. A report was called for from the learned trial Court. As per the report received contained in letter dated 25.9.2024, three witnesses out of the seven witnesses have been examined on behalf of the prosecution.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in the F.I.R. wherein the petitioner, one Jitendra Rai and three unknown accused persons are said to have resorted to firing together with the progress in the trial in the learned trial Court, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.
8. Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (Partha Sarthy, J) avinash/- U T