High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Ashok Kumar Mishra @ Ladu Mishra vs State Of Bihar on 6 December, 2010

Patna High Court – Orders
Ashok Kumar Mishra @ Ladu Mishra vs State Of Bihar on 6 December, 2010
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                Cr.Misc. No.24750 of 2010

                  Ashok Kumar Mishra @ Ladu Mishra S/O Late Shyam Prasad Mishra
                  R/o Village- Sihuri, P.S. Amarpur , District-Banka
                                                                     ---Petitioner
                                                 Versus
                                          STATE OF BIHAR
                                               -----------

04 06-12-2010 Heard Sri B.P.Pandey, learned Senior counsel for the

petitioner, Sri R.B.S. Pahepuri, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor

appearing on behalf of the State and Sri Arbind Kumar Tiwary,

learned counsel for the informant.

The sole petitioner, who is in custody in connection with

Sessions Trial No.656 of 2010 arising out of Amarpur P.S. Case

No.34 of 2010 registered for the offences under Sections 324,326,

307, 302 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act, has

prayed for grant of bail.

The accusation against the petitioner is that he opened fire

from his gun, in which the son of the informant died and other two

persons received fire arm injury. Case diary was called for.

Sri B.P.Pandey, Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner,

while pressing the bail petition, submits that in the occurrence the

petitioner was initially assaulted by the informant and in spur of the

moment he went inside his house and after carrying his gun he

opened fire, in which accidentally son of the informant died and

other two received injury. Accordingly, it has been prayed to grant

bail to the petitioner.

While opposing the prayer for bail of the petitioner,
2

learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State as well as by Sri

Tiwary , learned counsel for the informant has submitted that the

prosecution case has been supported consistently by number of

witnesses.

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am

not inclined to extend the privilege of bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

It has been informed that after commitment of the case,

charge has already been framed. Accordingly, it is desirable to direct

the court below to expedite the trial, so that it may come to its

logical end without any delay.

NKS/-                                    ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)