Patna High CourtCR. MISC./62179/2022rejected

Baldau Singh Patel @ Chhotu Singh Patel @ Chhotu @ Baldau Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2022-12-21Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62179 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-73 Year-2019 Thana- BHABHUA District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== BALDAU SINGH PATEL @ CHHOTU SINGH PATEL @ CHHOTU @ BALDAU SINGH SON OF SRI SATYENDRA SINGH R/O VILLAGESIKATHI, P.S.- BHABHUA, DISTRICT- KAIMUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Bandana Singh, Adv.

For the State :

Md. Nazir Ansari, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 21-12-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsels appearing on behalf of the State and the Informant. The petitioner is accused in connection with Babhua P.S. Case No. 73 of 2019 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 111 of 2019 / 41 of 2019 registered under section 363 of the Indian Penal Code and later on Section 364(A) of the Indian Penal Code was added.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Further submission is that the prayer for bail of the appellant was earlier thrice rejected by this Court vide orders dated 11.09.2019, 09.09.2020 and 25.08.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. Nos. 36860 of 2019, 12334 of 2020 and 35582 of 2021

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62179 of 2022(3) dt.21-12-2022 2/2 respectively. She further submits that the petitioner is rotting in custody since 02.03.2019.

Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the State and the informant vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner with submission that earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner was thrice rejected by this Court and there is no fresh ground for reconsideration of the prayer for bail.

Having considered the above facts and circumstances of the case and nature of allegation, this Court is not inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioner for bail. Accordingly, prayer for grant of regular bail of the petitioner is again rejected. utkarsh/- (Arvind Srivastava, J) U T