Dismissed

Abdul @ Chand v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC23 Sept 2013CR. MISC./11000/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order rejects the petitioner's bail prayer in a criminal case relying on circumstantial evidence and a prior bail rejection for a co-accused. The court allows liberty to renew the prayer considering the trial's progress and a prior direction for speedy conclusion.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for bail rejected; liberty to renew prayer in light of prior order and trial status.

Abdul @ Chand Vs The State Of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11000 of 2013 (6) dt.23-09-2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶3

Criminal Miscellaneous No.11000 of 2013

¶4

====================================================== 1. Abdul @ Chand S/O Md. Ahad @ Jamuk Ke Maulana .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 6 23-09-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶5

Petitioner is named in the first information report but admittedly, the case hinges upon the circumstantial evidence and in course of investigation, call details were collected and furthermore, some witnesses claimed to have seen the petitioner in the company of the deceased prior to recovery of his dead body. Moreover, having more or less similar allegation, the prayer for bail of co-accused, Guddu @ Md. Sahib has already been rejected by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.07.2013 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 6870 of 2013.

¶6

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail and hence, his prayer for bail in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 356 of 2012 pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad stands rejected.

¶7

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11000 of 2013 (6) dt.23-09-2013

¶8

A Bench of this Court has already directed the trial court to conclude the trial within one year and it is informed on behalf of the petitioner that trial has already commenced and up till now near about four prosecution witnesses have already been examined.

¶9

In the aforesaid circumstance, petitioner is given liberty to renew his prayer for bail in the light of observation given by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.07.2013 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 6870 of 2013.

¶10

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J)

¶11

SHAHZAD/-

Abdul @ Chand v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul @ Chand v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Keshav Sah @ Keshav Saw Vs The State Of Bihar

Arun Kumar and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Jangal Mandal Vs The State Of Bihar

Mukesh Bhagat @ Mukesh Kumar Bhagat Vs The State Of Bihar

Manish Kumar @ Bindu Singh @ Baba Vs The State Of Bihar