Sunny Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85373 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-211 Year-2023 Thana- PATLIPUTRA District- Patna ====================================================== Sunny Kumar Son of Surendra Mahto @@ Surendra Prasad Resident of Gosai Tola, Chandsi Dawakhana ke pas, P.S.-Patliputra, District-Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Akhauri Sahay, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 09-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State and perused the case diary.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Patliputra P.S. Case No. 211 of 2023 instituted for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 307 & 302 of the Indian Penal Code. 3.

Prosecution case in short is that when the police party were on patrolling duty, they saw that the petitioner is beating one person and was trying to put him into tempo. Thereafter, the injured person was taken to PMCH, Patna. 4.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 10-03-2023. Petitioner bears four criminal antecedents, as per disclosure made in paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85373 of 2023(4) dt.09-05-2024 2/3 5.

It has been further submitted by the petitioner's counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that there is no independent witness to the occurrence. It is submitted that police has forcibly obtained signature of the petitioner on a plain paper, which was used as a seizure memo. It is next submitted that petitioner has been implicated in this case due to village politics. 6.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. It is submitted that driving license of the deceased was recovered from the possession of the petitioner, which fact finds mention in paragraph Nos. 2 & 3 of the case diary.

7.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, there being direct allegation against the petitioner and nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8.

Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is rejected.

9.

The Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

10.

However, petitioner will be at liberty to renew

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85373 of 2023(4) dt.09-05-2024 3/3 his prayer for bail before the court below if the trial is not concluded within a period of six months and the court below shall consider the same without being prejudiced to this order.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T