An oral order rejecting bail in a poisoning case under IPC sections 328/302/34. The bench directed the trial court to expedite the trial. No legal principles were established, as the bail prayer was dismissed without detailed reasoning.
Bail rejected; trial directed to be held expeditiously.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.21753 of 2016
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -50 Year- 2013 Thana -NARHAT District- NAWADA ====================================================== Nawal Singh son of Late Bachchu Singh, resident of village- Sinduari, P.S.Narhat, District - Nawada .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Dr. Anjani Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 20-05-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Narhat P.S. Case No.50 of 2013 registered under Sections 328 and 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no truth behind the allegations made in the FIR. The petitioner tried his level best to save the life of the victim, but unfortunately he died in course of treatment.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the application for grant of bail to the petitioner. He has submitted that it is a gross case in which the FIR is based on the statement given by the victim to his father. The victim had stated
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21753 of 2016 (2) dt.20-05-2016
2/2
that the petitioner and others had administered milk mixed with poison as a result of which he fallen sick. He has further submitted that the viscera report of the deceased would indicate that the cause of death of the son of the informant was due to poisoning as aluminium phosphide was detected in the fluid sent for viscera test.
I have heard the parties and perused the materials on
record.
Regard being had to the serious nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected.
At this stage, it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since the charges have already been framed, the trial may be expedited.
The trial court is hereby directed to hold the trial of the case expeditiously and dispose it of as early as possible.
(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)
Md.S./-
U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner alleged to have administered poison?
Whether the trial court should expedite the framing of charges trial?
How should an application for expedited trial be disposed of when charges are framed?
Nawal Singh
The State of Bihar
Ashwani Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
