Dismissed

Chanchal Mishra v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC21 Aug 2017CR. MISC./34012/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court dismissed a bail petition of a petitioner charged under Section 302 IPC and Arms Act. The court, noting the petitioner was not named in the FIR for the murder charge, rejected the prayer but directed the trial court to conclude the trial within one year, allowing a fresh bail application thereafter. Order dated 21-08-2017.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for bail rejected. Trial directed to conclude within one year; fresh prayer for bail permissible after one year.

Chanchal Mishra Vs The State Of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.34012 of 2017

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -103 Year- 2016 Thana -DUMRAUN District- BUXAR

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Chanchal Mishra Son of Bharat Mishra, R/o Village- Karahansi, P.S.Buxar (M), District- Buxar.

¶5

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

.... .... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manendra Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 21-08-2017 Heard the parties.

¶11

The petitioner seeks regular bail in Dumraon P.S. Case No.103 of 2016 for the offence under Section 302 of I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶12

Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and this case is under Section 302 of I.P.C, but after lapse of one year he had been remanded in this case on the basis of one another case being Rajpur P.S. Case No.111/16 in which some arms were recovered.However, he is acquitted in the Arms Act also. So far criminal antecedent against the petitioner is concerned, 19 criminal cases are in his credit.

¶13

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is only suspicion against him. No test identification

¶14

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34012 of 2017 (3) dt.21-08-2017

¶15

2/2

¶16

parade has been held.

¶17

Heard learned A.P.P. also who opposed this petition and submits that the arms recovered in Rajpur P.S.Case No.111/16 tallies with the ballistic report.

¶18

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Prayer for bail is rejected.

¶19

However, trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within a period of one year and if the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after one year.

¶20

With the aforesaid observation this petition is dismissed.

¶21

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J)

¶22

AnilKrSinha/-

¶23

U T

Chanchal Mishra v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chanchal Mishra 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

Sanjeet Kumar Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Mahendra Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Osihar Singh and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Md. Tinkori Vs The State Of Bihar

Amit Singh @ Amit Kumar Rai Vs The State Of Bihar

Gautam Kumar @ Gulshan Vs The State Of Bihar