Prabhunarayan Singh @ Prabhu Narayan Singh v. The State of Bihar
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 302, 304(B)
Judgment
Heard Mr.Dharmendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Mohammad Sufyan, learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
15.12.2022 in connection with S.Tr.No.455 of 2022 arising out of Kudra P.S. Case No. 212 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 08.08.2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304(B),34 of IPC and later on Section 302 of IPC was added.
Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 21.09.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No.32623 of 2023. The petitioner has again moved before this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 73871 of 2024 which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 18.10.2024 with liberty to the petitioner to move before the learned court below.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 15.12.2022 and the trial is not in Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12317 of 2025(3) dt.11-04-2025 progress.
Vide order dated 21.02.2025 a report was called for with regard to the present stage of the trial. The report of the learned Trial Court dated 06.03.2025 reveals that out of seven chargesheet witnesses, five witnesses including informant, I.O. and Doctor have already been examined and only two private witnesses are still yet to be examined in the present case.
Learned APP for the State, on the basis of the material available on the record and the case diary, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
Considering the report of the learned Trial Court as well as allegation against the petitioner as alleged in the FIR, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with S.Tr.No.455 of 2022 arising out of Kudra P.S. Case No. 212 of 2022 pending in the court of learned District Addl. Sessions Judge 1st Cum-Special Judge, Kaimur at Bhabhua.
Prayer is refused.
However, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.