Dismissed

Sintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC27 Nov 2017CR. MISC./37582/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge rejected the bail application of a petitioner accused under the Arms Act, noting his prior involvement in a related murder case. The court directed the trial court to conclude proceedings within a year and reserved the petitioner's right to renew the bail prayer if the trial is delayed.

What did the court decide?

Application for bail rejected. Trial directed to be concluded within one year with liberty to renew prayer upon default.

Sintu Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.37582 of 2017

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -26 Year- 2017 Thana -GAMAHARIYA District- MADHEPURA

¶3

====================================================== 1. Sintu Kumar S/o Bijendra Yadav, Resident of Village-Manahara Sukhasan, Ward No.4, P.S.Singheshwar, District-Madhepura.

¶4

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shekhar Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Vinod Shankar Modi

¶5

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER

¶6

4 27-11-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶7

learned APP for the State.

¶8

Petitioner is languishing in custody since 01.03.2017 in connection with Gamharia P.S. Case No. 26 of 2017 for offences punishable under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 of the Arms Act.

¶9

The prosecution case, as lodged by the police personnel, is that on the self statement of the petitioner the house of one Shanti Devi was searched and a countrymade pistol with live cartridge was recovered hidden in the house. Accordingly, a seizure-list was prepared.

¶10

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for

¶11

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37582 of 2017 (4) dt.27-11-2017

¶12

2/3

¶13

the petitioner that he is innocent and except Gamharia P.S. Case No. 25 of 2017, which was lodged for the same offence, he is not accused in any other case. He submits that charges have been framed and petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the trial on day-to-day basis.

¶14

However, learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail stating therein that the present case is an off shoot of the other case bearing Gamharia P.S. Case No. 25 of 2017 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act in which the petitioner had confessed to have killed his wife and hid the pistol, which was recovered on his own confession. He further submits that he has killed his wife in the parental house to whom he had married four years back.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances and the materials on record, I am not inclined to grant privilege of bail to the petitioner at this stage in connection with Gamharia P.S. Case No. 26/2017, pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M.-IV, Madhepura.

¶16

Application is, accordingly, rejected. However, trial court is directed to conclude the trial within a year.

¶17

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37582 of 2017 (4) dt.27-11-2017

¶18

3/3

¶19

Petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail if the trial is not concluded by that time.

¶20

(Nilu Agrawal, J)

¶21

Rajesh/-

¶22

U T

Sintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sintu Kumar 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

Bhutali Khalifa Nut @ Butali Khalifa Vs The State Of Bihar

Sugrib Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Sonu Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Dilip Choudhary @ Dili Choudhary Vs The State Of Bihar

Nabisa Khatoon and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Radha Mohan Thakur @ Radha Thakur @ Radha Vs The State Of Bihar