IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.3300 of 2011
Mutur Roy Son of Arjun Roy
Versus
The State Of Bihar
-----------
3. 25.7.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the
State.
The petitioner seeks bail in Rajpur P.S.case No.55 of
2008 (S. Tr. No.128 of 2009) instituted for the offence
u/s.302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.
The petitioner was refused bail by orders dated
25.11.2009 and 7.7.2010 respectively vide Cr.Misc.No.40220
of 2009 and Cr.Misc.No.21164 of 2010 since there was an
allegation against him that he had fired on the head of the
deceased as well as since the victim had named the present
petitioner.
A report was called for from the Trial Court since the
petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail on the ground that
no sufficient progress is made during trial. The Trial Court has
informed that four witnesses have been examined during trial
and the rest of the witnesses are not produced by the
prosecuting agency and he has expressed his frustration in
proceeding with the trial on account of non-cooperative
attitude of the prosecuting agency.
Let this report of the Trial Court (Additional Sessions
Judge, F.T.C. 3rd, Buxar) be forwarded to the S.P., Buxar. The
Trial Court is also directed to send a list of the witnesses fixing
-2-
specific dates for production of the witnesses along with a
copy of this order to the S.P., Buxar and the S.P., Buxar is
directed to ensure production of the witnesses on the date so
fixed by the Trial Court so that there is no further delay in trial.
If the S.P., Buxar finds that such police officers are purposely
evading their production as a witness during trial, he shall
strict measures against the officers concerned.
In view of such, I am not inclined to review the earlier
order. The prayer for bail is once again rejected.
Narendra/ ( Anjana Prakash, J. )