PRINCE KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The instant bail application has been preferred by the petitioner for grant of regular bail for the offences registered under Sec. 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after rejection of the earlier bail application of this petitioner a development took place inasmuch as the charge has been framed on 27/5/2024. However, even after a lapse of three months, none of the charge-sheeted witness has been examined; as such it can be assumed that the trial will not be concluded soon. Moreover, the petitioner is lying in custody from 8/5/2023 and the co-accused namely, Raushan Kumar @ Roshan Kumar in B.A. No.6521 of 2024 and Santu Prasad Yadav in B.A. No.6365 of 2024 has been allowed bail by this Court and the allegations of those co-accused were same and similar; as such, he may be enlarged on bail. He is ready to abide by all the conditions imposed by this Court.