Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1199/2023disposed

Raj Kumar Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

2023-11-08Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Panwar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1199 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2020 Thana- MOHAMMADPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== RAJ KUMAR SAHANI Son of Late Naga Sahani Residence of Village - Majhwaliya, P.S.- Mohammadpur, District - Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 1719 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2020 Thana- MOHAMMADPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== HARENDRA SAHANI @ HARENDAR SAHANI S/O LATE NAGA SAHANI Resident of Village- Majhwaliya, P.S.- Mohammadpur, DistrictGopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 1199 of 2023) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Baijnath Sah For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pushpa Sinha (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 1719 of 2023) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Baijnath Sah For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pushpa Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 08-11-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The instant application for regular bail has been filed by the petitioners in connection with Mohammadpur P.S. Case No. 102 of 2020 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 325, 307, 302 and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1199 of 2023(7) dt.08-11-2023 2/2 504 of the IPC.

3. Earlier the application for regular bail of the petitioners were rejected vide order dated 06.12.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 25289 of 2021.

4. The allegation against the petitioners along with others is of brutally assaulting the informant and his son due to which the informant sustained injury and his son namely, Jitendra Sahani succumbed to injury.

5. From the perusal of the trial Court report, which is kept at "Flag A" it appears that the trial is likely to be concluded within six months.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail and, as such, their prayer for bail stands rejected.

7. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of.

8. Hence, trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within its stipulated time, which is mentioned in its report, failing which, the petitioners will be at liberty to renew their prayer for bail.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Arish/- U T