Kalicharan Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.38269 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -175 Year- 2016 Thana -MAHARAJGANJ District- SIWAN ======================================================

1. Kalicharan Manjhi Son of Subash Manjhi, R/o Village- Pengawara, P.S.- Pachrukhi, District- Siwan.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Asha Devi ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 07-09-2017 Heard the parties.

This application is for grant of regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial No.15 of 2017 (arising out of Mahrajganj P.S.Case No.175 of 2016), registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner is not named in the FIR and the case is under Section 302 of the I.P.C. of killing the deceased who happens to be brother of the petitioner.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that except suspicion there is nothing against the petitioner nor last seen nor there is any other incriminating material. It is further submitted that the other co-accused person, Kunti Devi has already been granted bail by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38269 of 2017 (3) dt.07-09-2017 2/2 28.6.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No.20226 of 2017 with whom it is alleged that this petitioner has illicit relation. It is also submitted that three witnesses have already been examined and all of them have turn hostile.

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner considering the fact that the trial is in advance stage, however, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within a period of six months. It is also made clear that if the trial is not concluded within the period of six months, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the court concerned, who will pass appropriate order on the basis of materials available at that time without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

With the aforesaid observation, this application is disposed of.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U T