The High Court granted bail to the petitioner charged with offences under the IPC and Arms Act, noting that the trial had not concluded within six months and no witness was examined.
Petitioner released on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount.
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.46034 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-745 Year-2019 Thana- FATUA District- Patna
======================================================
PAWAN KUMAR SINGH @ PAWAN @ LALA @ PAWANKUMAR SON OF RAM BABU SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- SOTICHAK, PSFATUHA, DISTT- PATNA
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar BIHAR
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Kanchan Kumari For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Pranav Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER
3 01-09-2023
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46034 of 2023(3) dt.01-09-2023 2/4
antecedent of three cases in which he is on bail in all cases. He further submits that the bail prayer of the present petitioner has already been rejected by this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 45067 of 2022 on 07.12.2022 with an observation that the petitioner may renew prayer for bail after six months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order to the concerned court, if there is no substantial progress in the proceeding of trial within the stipulated period. He further submits that he has filed the present bail petition after eight months from the date of rejection of his previous bail prayer. Learned counsel for the petitioner orally further submits that the charge has been framed on 26.06.2023 and not a single witness has been examined. He further submits that the delay of trial is not attributable to the present petitioner as he is in custody since 13.05.2022.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46034 of 2023(3) dt.01-09-2023 3/4
248 dated 01.08.2023 has sent its report which reveals that not a single witness has been examined. The aforesaid report further reflects that the delay of trial is not attributable to the present petitioner as he is in custody since 13.05.2022.
(i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.
(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46034 of 2023(3) dt.01-09-2023 4/4
(iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or
the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)
alok/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant bail to the petitioner considering the delay in trial and the stage of trial?
What conditions should be imposed on the petitioner for release on bail?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Pawan Kumar Singh
The State of Bihar
Alok Kumar Pandey
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
