The Patna HC rejected the applicant's renewed bail prayer in a murder case pending under B.N.S.S. directions the Trial Judge to conclude the trial within two months to ensure statutory time limits are met.
Bail prayer rejected; Trial directed to conclude within 2 months; if not concluded, applicant to be released on bail.
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.56375 of 2015
| Arising Out of PS.Case No. -141 Year- 2012 Thana -KOCHAS District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== |
|
|---|---|
Mantu Lal, S/o Sanjay Lal, R/O Village- Kochas (Buxar Road), P.S.- Kochas, Dist.- Rohtas, Bihar. |
|
| .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== |
|
| Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. P.K. Singh, Adv. For the Informant : Mr. Dilip Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mr. M. Rab, A.P.P. ====================================================== |
|
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER |
|
| 4 | 16-02-2016 Rejoinder to the counter affidavit on behalf of the |
| petitioner has been filed. Let the same be kept on record. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State. The petitioner wants to renew the prayer of bail, which was earlier rejected twice by order dated 07.10.2013 and 20.03.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 15848 of 2013 and Cr. Misc. No. 20014 of 2014, on the ground that the petitioner is suffering in custody since 29.12.2012 and as per observation made in the order dated 20.03.2015, trial has not been concluded within six |
|
| months and further, during the investigation, no evidence | |
| regarding killing of wife if the petitioner has come. |
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.56375 of 2015 (4) dt.16-02-2016
2/2
Learned A.P.P. duly assisted by learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for bail by submitting that from perusal of the impugned order, it is apparent that the trial is likely be concluded in near future.
In the facts and circumstances stated above, at this stage, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and accordingly, his prayer for bail again stands rejected.
However, learned Trial Judge is directed to conclude the trial preferably within two months and if without any fault of the petitioner, his trial is not concluded within two months from the date of receipt or production of a copy of this order, then the petitioner shall be released on bail on execution of bail bond to the satisfaction of learned Trial Judge.
(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J)
kunal/-
U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is eligible for release on bail after period of custody without conclusion of trial within the statutory period.
Whether the Trial Judge is directed to conclude the trial within a specific time frame.
What relief is available to the applicant if the trial is not concluded within the directed period.
Mantu Lal
The State of Bihar
JITENDRA Mohan Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
