Single judge order refusing bail to the petitioner accused of offences under IPC and Arms Act for firing at police party, fixing a one-year timeline for trial conclusion.
Application for bail rejected; trial directed to conclude within one year; witnesses production ordered.
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.4635 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2018 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai
======================================================
Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Singh @ Parikshit Singh @ Parichhit Singh Sri Vinod Singh resident of village - Bariyarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Prabhu Narayan Sharma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mohammed Arif ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER
3 10-04-2019
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offences under Sections 353, 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 25(1-AA), 25(1-A), 25(1-d), 25 (1-B)a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.
Prosecution case, in short, is that the accused persons variously armed fired at the police party and from possession of them huge quantity of arms and ammunition were recovered.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 13.5.2018. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4635 of 2019(3) dt.10-04-2019 2/3
substantive evidence to suggest his implication in the present case. No substantive evidence has come in course of investigation also. Counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner has criminal antecedents but he was on bail in all the cases.
On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. The petitioner and other coaccuseds are alleged to have fired at the police party. From the possession of the petitioner, one rifle along with 6 live cartridges whereas from the possession of co-accused Monu Kumar, one carbine and 4 live cartridges and from the possession of Gujjo Singh, one loaded country made pistol were recovered. The petitioner has criminal antecedents.
Considering the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected. The Trial Court is directed to take all necessary steps to conclude the trial within a period of one year preferably on day to day basis from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
The District Magistrate, Begusarai and the Superintendent of Police, Begusarai are also directed to take necessary steps to produce the remaining witnesses on the date fixed in the Trial Court so that the trial could be concluded
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4635 of 2019(3) dt.10-04-2019 3/3
within the stipulated period.
Let this order be communicated to the District Magistrate, Begusarai and the Superintendent of Police, Begusarai.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
Pankaj/-
U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of offences under Sections 353, 307 and 304 IPC and Arms Act.
Steps to be taken by the Trial Court to conclude the trial within one year.
Steps to be taken by the District Magistrate and Superintendent of Police to produce witnesses.
Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Singh @ Parikshit Singh @ Parichhit Singh
The State of Bihar
SUDHIR SINGH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
