Lukhara Mahto @ Ajit Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64719 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2003 Thana- NOWKOTHI GARHPURA DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== LUKHARA MAHTO @ AJIT MAHTO Son of Kamli Mahto Resident of village- Sisauni, P.S.- Nowkothi, District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Gaurav Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 23-03-2023 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with S.T. No. 408 of 2019 arising out of Nowkothi P.S. Case No. 33 of 2003, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 326, 307 of the Indian Penal code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

As per allegation, the petitioner committed the murder of brother of the informant as he was not paying ransom of Rs. 20,000/- to the petitioner.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, except the informant, there is no eye-witness of the occurrence. All the witnesses examined during course of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64719 of 2022(3) dt.23-03-2023 2/2 investigation, are heresay witnesses. He has submitted further that the petitioner is under custody since 05.01.2019 and up-tillnow, only one witness has been examined, despite the fact that charges have been framed in this case in the year 2019. On the other hand, the learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the informant is the eyewitness and before his eyes, his brother was killed at the hands of the petitioner by fire arm. The post-mortem report corroborates the allegation as fire arm injury was found on the person of the deceased. Paragraph no. 103 of the case diary contains the post-mortem report.

It appears that the trial is proceeding on a snail pace as only one eye-witness has been examined, despite the fact that charges have been framed in the year 2019.

The learned court below shall take every endeavour to dispose of this case within a period of six months. If the trial is not concluded within a period of six months, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

With these observations, the petition is disposed of. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Kundan/Nirmal U T