The Patna High Court Court dismissed the applicant's bail application in a case involving grievous bodily harm and extinction of life, holding the prayer should be rejected while directing the trial court to proceed expeditiously.
Application for bail rejected.
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.14175 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-137 Year-2020 Thana- HUSSAINGANJ District- Siwan
======================================================
Awadhesh Yadav, Son of Ramashray Yadav, Resident of Village - Parari (Padari), P.s.- Hussainganj (M.H.Nagar), Distt.- Siwan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Satyendra Rai, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER
3 18-05-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Hussainganj (M.H. Nagar) P.S. Case No.137 of 2020 giving rise to S.Trial No.30 of 2021 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 302, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, which is pending in the court of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-VIII, Siwan.
Petitioner’s prayer for bail was earlier rejected.
Allegation is of death being caused as a result of shock and haemorrhage and that at least five injuries have been sustained by the deceased, wherein the petitioner along with his family members have allegedly assaulted the victim. Three witnesses, out of six have already appeared to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14175 of 2022(3) dt.18-05-2022 2/2
depose and have deposed at the trial, as per the report of the trial court dated 26.04.2022.The petitioner is stated to be in custody since 06.06.2020 and in view of the fact that three witnesses remained to be examined, counsel for the informant also submits that in all likelihood the trial would proceed without any undue adjournments or unnecessary delay.
The application thus stands dismissed.
The prayer for bail is rejected with an observation that the trial court should proceed expeditiously without granting any undue adjournments or unnecessary delay.
This Court would expect that the petitioner’s counsel would honour his undertaking in the instant proceedings regarding supply of the requisite court fee etc. within two weeks from the date he is called upon to do so by the office.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J)
PNM
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant in view of the pending trial and remaining witnesses.
Awadhesh Yadav
Madhuresh Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
