Patna High CourtCR. MISC./42992/2017rejected

Tunna Jha @ Chandra Ketu Jha v. The State Of Bihar

2017-09-20Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.42992 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -270 Year- 2015 Thana -BAHERI District- DARBHANGA ====================================================== Tunna Jha @ Chandra Ketu Jha son of Chandra Kant Jha resident of Village- Manik Chauk, P.S.- Runni Saidpur, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Anisur Rahman For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Renuka Ratnakar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 20-09-2017 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner wants to renew his prayer for bail which was earlier rejected by order dated 16.09.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 33820 of 2016 which was disposed of with Cr. Misc. No. 31112 of 2016, on the ground that the petitioner is suffering in custody since 29.12.2015 and only on the basis of the criminal antecedent the petitioner has been implicated in this case, the confessional statement of Anchal Jha made before the police has got no evidentiary value in the eye of law, without any legal and cogent material the petitioner has been charge sheeted resulting he is suffering in custody, other co-accused have been allowed bail by different co-ordinate Benches of this Court.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42992 of 2017 (2) dt.20-09-2017 2/2 The learned A.P.P. opposes prayer for bail of the petitioner by submitting that during investigation sufficient materials have been collected which goes to suggest involvement of the petitioner in the crime.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, finding no good ground for reconsideration of prayer for bail, again prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected in connection with S. Tr. No. 146 of 2016 arising out of Baheri P.S. Case No. 270 of 2015 pending in the court of Sessions Judge, Darbhanga. However, the trial court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial after keeping the same on the priority basis preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, failing which the petitioner, if at no fault, may be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T