Patna High CourtCR. MISC./84411/2023bail granted

Tanik Raut @ Tilak Raut @ Tanik Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

2024-05-03Mr. Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84411 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-1994 Thana- KAUWAKOL District- Nawada ====================================================== Tanik Raut @ Tilak Raut @ Tanik Prasad Son Of Late Keshar Raut Resident Of Village - Kharsari, P.S. - Kawakol, District - Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajeev Nayan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 03-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Kawakole P.S. Case No. 89 of 1994 registered for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. It is a case of assault with rifle, gadasa, lathi on the informant and other family members resulting in death of the brother of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case.

5. However, learned APP for the State vehemently

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84411 of 2023(4) dt.03-05-2024 2/2 opposed the prayer for regular bail.

6. On perusal of the FIR and impugned order dated 20.09.2023, it appears that FIR was registered on 14.11.1994, petitioner not surrendered before the trial Court and petitioner is absconding for last 29 years and he surrendered on 14.08.2023. In these circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this petition stands rejected.

8. However, the trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period of six months, the petitioner may be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T