Kanna @ Amar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.76578 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2014 Thana- ISMAILPUR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Kanna @ Amar Yadav, Son of Naresh Yadav, Resident of Village- Adarsh Nagar Fulkia, P.S.- Ghogha, District- Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 29-01-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and State. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Ismailpur P.S. Case No. 31 of 2014 for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. He further submits that although the petitioner was named in the F.I.R., but due to the fact that he was out of station for earning bread and butter, he could not surrender earlier and the petitioner surrendered only on 27.09.2018. He submits that the similarly circumstanced other co-accused have been granted bail by different co-ordinate Benches of this Court.

Considering the fact that similarly circumstanced

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.76578 of 2018(3) dt.29-01-2019 2/2 other accused persons have been granted bail, the petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Naugachhia, Bhagalpur in connection with Ismailpur P.S. Case No. 31 of 2014.

As the case is of the year 2014, the court below is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within a period of nine months and in the event any of the accused persons including the petitioner will try to delay the conclusion of the trial, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel bail bonds of accused involved in causing delay. Although after grant of bail, the Court becomes officio functus in the case, but in the peculiar facts of this case, the Court directs the court below to submit status report to the Registry after nine months.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) uday/- U