The Bench dismissed the regular bail application pending the medical opinion on the nature of injury sustained by the informant and the framing of charges.
The application for regular bail was dismissed.
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.2913 of 2020
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-393 Year-2019 Thana- SAUR BAZAR District- Saharsa
======================================================
KANCHAN SINGH Son of Kamleshwari Prasad Singh Resident of Village - Golma, P.S.- Saur Bazar (Patarghat O.P.), Distt.- Saharsa.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Satish Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Umesh Lal Verma ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER
2 20-01-2020 Heard the parties.
This application is for grant of regular bail in connection with Saur Bazar (Patarghat OP) P.S.Case No.393 of 2019 for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307,379, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per FIR, petitioner is said to have stabbed the informant causing injury.
Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the injured was veteran criminal and there is case and counter case from both sides. Injured has received injury on falling on the pointed bamboo. He is in custody for about four months, having no criminal antecedent.
Heard learned A.P.P. , who has opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that the opinion about the injury is still
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2913 of 2020(2) dt.20-01-2020 2/2 2020
kept reserved..
Having heard both sides and in view submissions as made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, however, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail once nature of the injury was received or after framing of the charge, whichever is earlier.
With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.
(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J)
chn/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted at this stage in a case involving offences under Sections 307, 341, 323, 324, 379, 504, and 506 of the IPC.
Kanchan Singh
The State of Bihar
Vinod Kumar Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
