Dismissed

Rajesh Dubey v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC18 Aug 2021CR. MISC./13263/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court, in a bail application filed under Section 302 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act, rejected the petitioner's prayer for bail, affirming the Lower Court's decision. The Court directed the DM and SP to ensure witness production for timely trial conclusion.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. District Magistrate and Superintendent of Police, Rohtas directed to ensure production of witnesses for trial conclusion within six months.

Rajesh Dubey Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13263 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2019 Thana- KARAHGAR District- Rohtas

¶3

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

¶4

RAJESH DUBEY S/o Late Dheo Prasad Dubey R/o village- Sheopur, P.S.Kargahar, District- Rohtas at Sasaram

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Raghunandan Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.A.G. ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 18-08-2021

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State through virtual mode.

¶13

The petitioner seeks bail in Sessions Trial No. 470 of 2019 arising out of Karahgar P.S. Case No. 155 of 2019 registered under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.

¶14

Earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide Annexure-1 to the present application taking into account that the deceased was dragged out from his house by the petitioner and other accused persons and thereafter, he was shot dead.

¶15

A report was called for from the trial court. It has been reported that out of eight charge sheeted witnesses, two have already been examined and the trial is likely to be concluded within six months.

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13263 of 2021(3) dt.18-08-2021 2/2

¶17

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the Complaint Case/F.I.R.

¶18

Considering the accusation and stage of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

¶19

The District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police, Rohtas at Sasaram are directed to ensure the production of witnesses on the date fixed by the trial court so that the trial could be concluded within the stipulated period of six months from the date of receipt/production of copy of the order.

¶20

Let a copy of this order be communicated to the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police, Rohtats at Sasaram for needful.

¶21

(Sudhir Singh, J)

¶22

A.K.V.//-

¶23

U T

Rajesh Dubey v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Dubey 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bibi Aysa @ Aysa Vs the State of Bihar

Ajay Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Lal Bihari Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Anar Kali Devi @ Anarkali Devi Vs the State of Bihar

Santosh Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Raj Ballav Mahto @ Raj Balan Mahto @ Raj Valam Mahto Vs the State of Bihar