Patna High CourtCR. MISC./42250/2017rejected

Santosh Sah v. The State Of Bihar

2017-11-07Justice Smt. Nilu Agrawal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.42250 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -30 Year- 2008 Thana -SINGHESHWARASHTHAN DistrictMADHEPURA ======================================================

1. Santosh Sah Son of Daya Ram Sah, resident of Village- Gauripur, P.S. Singeshwar, District- Madhepura.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dinesh Prasad Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar Srivastava ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 07-11-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in connection with Singeshwar P.S. Case No. 30 of 2008 for offences punishable under Sections 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case, as lodged by the Chowkidar, is that a dead body of a male was found near Karua Dhar bridge. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent, not named in the First Information Report, there is no eye-witness to the alleged occurrence and his name surfaced during investigation. He submits that charges have been framed on 18.02.2017, petitioner is remanded in this case and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42250 of 2017 (4) dt.07-11-2017 2/2 is languishing in judicial custody since 30.01.2017. He further submits that apart from the criminal antecedent there is no cogent material to rope the petitioner with the alleged occurrence. However, learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail stating therein that the petitioner is accused in as many as eight cases but has been acquitted in two cases and some of them are of similar nature.

Considering the facts and circumstances and the materials on record, I am not inclined to grant privilege of bail to the petitioner at this stage in connection with S.T. No. 59(B)/2009, arising out of Singeshwar P.S. Case No. 30 of 2008, pending in the court of learned A.D.J. 1st, Madhepura.

Application is, accordingly, rejected. However, learned court below is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within nine months. Petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after nine months.

(Nilu Agrawal, J) Rajesh/- U T