Amit Kumar Singh @ Amit Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.35906 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-32 Year-2013 Thana- SINGHIYA District- Samastipur ====================================================== Amit Kumar Singh @ Amit Singh S/o Late Ranjeet Singh, resident of VillageSaraiya, P.S.- Chautham, District- Khagaria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Satya Prakash Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Satyendra Prasad (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 27-06-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner wants to renew the prayer of bail, which was earlier rejected vide orders dated 16.02.2015, 10.02.2016, 25.01.2017 and 07.03.2018 passed in Cr. Misc. 27294 of 2014, Cr. Misc. No. 2726 of 2016, Cr. Misc. No. 52093 of 2016 and Cr. Misc. No. 12181 of 2018 respectively, on the ground that the petitioner is suffering in custody since 25.11.2013 and up till now only three prosecution witnesses have been examined, there was direction to conclude the trial within two months but the trial has not been concluded and the petitioner has been given liberty to renew his prayer for bail. F.I.R. has been lodged after two months and the statement of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.35906 of 2018(2) dt.27-06-2018 2/2 victim is contradictory from the F.I.R. and, as such, the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration. The learned A.P.P. fairly submits that trial has not been concluded though there was specific direction. In the facts and circumstances stated above, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District Judge-1, Samastipur in S.Tr. No. 532 of 2015/ 183 of 2016, (G.R. No. 295 of 2013) arising out of Singhiya P.S. Case No. 32 of 2013 subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Rajiv/- U T