Rajesh Sharma @ Pukki @ Pukki Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.26823 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -71 Year- 2014 Thana -SHAKURABAD District- JEHANABAD ====================================================== Rajesh Sharma @ Pukki @ Pukki Sharma, Son of Late Karu Sharma, Resident of Village- Kundala, Police Staton- Skurabad, District- Jehanabad. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar For the Informant : Mr. Ram Pravesh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Indra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 11-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

This is an application for bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 146 of 2017/42 of 2017, arising out of Sakurabad P.S.Case No. 71 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 448/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.

Allegation as per FIR against the petitioner is that he fired causing injury on right palm of informant and other accused persons have also fired at the informant.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that other co-accused, against whom there is allegation of firing and causing injury on chest of the informant, has already been granted bail and petitioner is in custody for seven months.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26823 of 2017 (2) dt.11-07-2017 2/2 Heard learned APP and learned counsel for the informant also. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that other co-accused has been convicted after trial and bail has been granted to other co-accused after completion of one year in custody, as such, petitioner does not deserve bail. It has also been submitted by learned counsel for informant that if petitioner cooperates in trial, trial would be concluded within four months. Having heard both sides and considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude the same within four months. If trial is not concluded with the said period, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the court below, who will consider the same and pass an appropriate order.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U