Partly allowed

Dhuri Koiri v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC11 Jul 2017CR. MISC./26555/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court rejected the petitioner's bail application in a 2004 IPC case due to criminal antecedents and discrepancies in evidence, despite co-accused bail. The Court directed the trial court to conclude proceedings within nine months. Bale bail application dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected. Trial court directed to conclude trial within 9 months. SP Siwan directed to ensure witness production.

Dhuri Koiri Vs The State Of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.26555 of 2017

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -25 Year- 2004 Thana -MAHARAJGANJ District- SIWAN

¶3

====================================================== 1. Dhuri Koiri aged about 50 years, Son of Subash Koiri @ Ram Subhag Koiri, @ Ram Sugam, Resident of Dhobwalia, P.S.- Maharajganj, Distt.Siwan.

¶4

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mithilesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Anil Prasad Singh

¶5

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶6

4 11-07-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Maharajganj P.S. Case No. 25 of 2004, registered for offences punishable under Section 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶7

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the articles which has been produced in the T.I.P. differs from the articles, which has been seized from the house of the petitioner. Further other co-accused having similar allegation has already been granted bail and petitioner has been in judicial custody since 15.04.2017

¶8

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the articles recovered from the house of the petitioner has been identified by the informant.

¶9

Having heard both sides, it appears from the perusal of

¶10

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26555 of 2017 (4) dt.11-07-2017

¶11

2/2

¶12

record that the case is of the year 2004 and charge-sheet in this case was submitted in the year 2007 and petitioner has now come in the year 2017, as such, considering the facts and circumstances coupled with the fact petitioner has criminal antecedents, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail, his application for regular bail is, accordingly, rejected.

¶13

However, considering the fact that the case is quite old, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within a period of nine months.

¶14

At the same time, S.P. Siwan is directed to ensure the production of witnesses in the trial court on the date fixed so that the trial can be concluded within the period as prescribed above.

¶15

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J)

¶16

sunil/-

¶17

U T

Dhuri Koiri v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhuri Koiri 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

Amarjeet Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Sandeep Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Munna @ Manoj Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar

Niranjan Kumar Bhagat Vs The State Of Bihar

Amit Sah @ Sukru Vs The State Of Bihar

Yogendra Chaudhary @ Gonga Vs The State Of Bihar