Patna High CourtCR. MISC./47444/2018dismissed

Ram Tiwary v. The State Of Bihar

2018-09-26Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.47444 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -119 Year- 2018 Thana -GARDANIBAGH District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Ram Tiwary Son of Late Saravjeet Tiwary, resident of VillageDhamawal Shahpur, Chamarpur, P.S.- Shahpur, District- Bhojpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. G.K.Jha, Advocate Mr. Surya Kant, Advocate For the State : Smt. Reena Sinha, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Arvind Kumar Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 26-09-2018 Heard the parties.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Gardanibagh P.S.Case No. 119 of 2018, arising out of G.R. No. 2056 of 2018, registered for the office under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Allegation against the petitioner as per F.I.R. is that after hearing the sound of firing, the informant came and know that the miscreants along with the petitioner after making firing on one Kameshwar Singh, causing death and after that, they flee away from there.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that only on the basis of the suspicion the F.I.R. has been lodged.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47444 of 2018 (3) dt.26-09-2018 2/2 It is further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 26.03.2018.

Heard learned A.P.P. as well as learned counsel for the informant, who opposes the prayer for bail on the ground that from the CCTV camera, the petitioner has been identified and he has earlier threatened the deceased of dire consequences. 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. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude the same expeditiously. With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.

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