High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Ram Ratan Bind & Ors. vs The State Of Bihar on 14 September, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Ram Ratan Bind & Ors. vs The State Of Bihar on 14 September, 2011
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               Criminal Miscellaneous No.16353 of 2011
                 ======================================================
                 1. Ram Ratan Bind, son of Late Ramphal Bind
                 2. Nagina Bind, son of Ram Ratan Bind
                    Both resident of village Bodhi Bigha, Police Station Pali,
                    District Jehanabad
                                                                .... .... Petitioner/s
                                                Versus
                 The State Of Bihar
                                                            .... .... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SHEEMA ALI KHAN

                 ORAL ORDER

(Per: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SHEEMA ALI KHAN)

4 14-09-2011 Heard Counsel for the petitioners, the informant and

the A.P.P. representing the State.

The petitioners are accused in a case under Sections

302, 364/34 of the Indian Penal Code. In connection with the

case, the petitioners are in custody since 27.06.2010. Earlier,

the prayer for bail on behalf of the above named petitioners was

rejected vide order dated 21.12.2010 passed in Criminal Misc.

No. 41885 of 2010.

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that two

co-accused persons, namely, Raj Kumar Bind and Bal Kumar

Bind have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated

01.04.2011 passed in Criminal Misc. NO. 938 of 2011.

The petitioners are in custody in a case where the

victim was kidnapped and later on murdered in a brutal manner.
2 Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16353 of 2011 (4) dt.14-09-2011

2/2

His eyes were taken out of the eye-ball. The said offence was

allegedly done by the extremist group (MALE), who are named

in the First Information Report.

Counsel for the informant submits that the trial has

already commenced and three witnesses have been examined in

this case. He further submits that the witness including the

informant have been threatened by the accused persons not to

lead evidence regarding their involvement in the case, for

which the informant has already filed an application before the

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad.

Considering all these aspects, I am not inclined to

grant bail to the above named petitioners. Accordingly, this

application is dismissed.

However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the

trial as early as possible.

(Sheema Ali Khan, J)
Prabhakar Anand/-