Petitioner sought bail in custody for alleged armed robbery and murder. Court held that despite no charge in FIR and existing bails in other similar cases, bail is not granted at this stage but trial should be expedited.
Bail application dismissed; trial to be concluded within nine months.
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.23872 of 2017
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -518 Year- 2016 Thana -MUZAFFARPUR SADAR DistrictMUZAFFARPUR
====================================================== Dharmendra Kumar @ Murabba, S/o Shivji Prasad Gupta, resident of Village- Muradpur Dullah, P.S.- Ahiyapur, District- Muzaffarpur.
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Petitioner Versus .... .... Opposite Party
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar @ S.K., Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Anita Kumari Singh, APP
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER
3 04-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
This is an application for bail in connection with Sadar P.S.Case No. 518 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 394, 511, 307, 302 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.
Petitioner is not named in the FIR.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that except confessional statement there is nothing against the petitioner and so far prosecution case is concerned, though he has been identified in CCTV camera but he is not there. Further submission is that though he has been made accused in nine other cases but in all those cases he is on bail and in this case he is in custody for six months.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23872 of 2017 (3) dt.04-07-2017
2/2
Heard learned APP also.
Having heard both sides and considering the fact that he has been made accused in nine other cases of similar type, I am
not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and try to conclude the same within a period of nine months and at the same time, Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarpur is directed to ensure the presence of the witnesses in court on the date fixed. If trial is not concluded within the said period, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.
Accordingly, this application is dismissed.
(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J)
spal/-
U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to petitioner already in custody for six months identified via CCTV and named in nine other cases.
Whether the trial must be concluded within a fixed period to allow for bail renewal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dharmendra Kumar @ Murabba
The State of Bihar
Vinod Kumar Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
