Dismissed

Md. Fahad @ Fauad v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC9 Jun 2021CR. MISC./38118/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court rejected the petitioner's bail application in a case involving offences under Sections 302 and 304B IPC as the trial was at the evidence stage with witnesses examined. The court directed the trial court to conclude the trial within nine months.

What did the court decide?

Bail rejected; trial ordered to conclude within nine months; liberty to renew prayer if delayed.

Md. Fahad @ Fauad Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38118 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2018 Thana- PIPRAHI District- Sheohar

¶3

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

¶4

MD. FAHAD @ FAUAD S/o Md. Ejaj Resident of Village-Nayagaon Mahuawa, P.S.-Piprahi, District-Sheohar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwari, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶11

4 09-06-2021

¶12

This matter is taken up for consideration through Video Conferencing under the orders of Hon’ble the Chief Justice.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in Piprahi P.S. Case No. 133 of 2018 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 20 of 2019, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304B, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

On the last occasion, vide order dated 22.03.2021, report was called for regarding the stage of trial and same has been received (kept at flag ‘A’), which reveals that charge has already been framed on 03.04.2019 and out of nine witnesses

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38118 of 2020(4) dt.09-06-2021 2/2

¶17

seven witnesses have already been examined and only informant, official witness (IO and doctor) are yet to be examined and the case is running in evidence stage.

¶18

Considering the nature of allegation and stage of trial, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

¶19

As the petitioner is in custody since 05.11.2018, trial court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within a period of nine months. If the same is not concluded within the stipulated period, petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

¶20

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

¶21

vinita/-

¶22

U T

Md. Fahad @ Fauad v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Fahad @ Fauad 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

Dilip Chaudhary Vs the State of Bihar

Sonu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Munna Kumar @ Munna Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Binod Singh Vs The State of Bihar

MD Hasim Laheri Vs the State of Bihar

Sonu Kumar Vs the State of Bihar