Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21369 of 2012 (5) dt.10-09-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No. 21369 of 2012 ====================================================== Tutu Singh @ Kanchan Kumar .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL PRASAD ORAL ORDER 5 10-09-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. This is a petition for grant of regular bail in a case under [STATUTE] . The prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner was rejected earlier. This is a case of single identification. The name of the petitioner has come in paragraph 21 of the case diary in the statement of one Rinki Kumari and in paragraph 24 of the case diary, the witness has stated that her Nanad identified Tutu Singh and in paragraph nos. 25 and 26 also the witnesses stated that they identified the petitioner. The defence of the petitioner is that it has come in paragraph 46 of the case diary that he was present on the road in intoxicated condition and he was taken to identify the house of the victim. It is further submitted that this is a case of identification by Rinki Kumari only. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21369 of 2012 (5) dt.10-09-2012 Hence, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial for early disposal of the case preferably within six months and the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after the evidence of Rinki Kumari. Kundan/- (Gopal Prasad, J.)

Applicable IPC Section: 395

Statute Text:
Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. Dacoity. Whoever commits dacoity shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.