Patna High CourtCR. MISC./2336/2022bail rejected

Dhananjay Mandal @ Bouku v. The State Of Bihar

2022-03-23Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2336 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-136 Year-2019 Thana- BHAWANIPUR District- Purnia ====================================================== DHANANJAY MANDAL @ BOUKU Son of Late Brahmdeo Mandal Resident of Village - Raipura Yadav Tola, Police Station- Bhawanipur, District - Purnea.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vikram Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 23-03-2022 Heard Mr. Vikram Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, learned APP for the State. Petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail inasmuch as earlier bail application of the petitioner was dismissed on merit vide order dated 23.12.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 35445/2020.

The allegation, as per First Information Report, is that the petitioner, allegedly, committed rape upon the wife of the informant.

This Court vide order dated 02.02.2022 had called for a report from the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea regarding stage of the trial and in pursuance thereof, the report vide Letter No. 54/2022 dated 10.02.2022 has been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2336 of 2022(3) dt.23-03-2022 2/2 received and from perusal of the same, it would be evident that the charges have been framed against the petitioner and the case is running for examination of prosecution evidence. The report further reveals that the trial of this case may be concluded within nine months if the prosecution produces the witnesses and defence co-operates in examination.

In view of the fact that there is direct allegation of rape upon the petitioner and the earlier bail application of the petitioner was rejected on its merit, I see no reason to grant bail to the petitioner in the second attempt. Accordingly, the same is dismissed.

However, petitioner, if so advised, may renew his prayer for bail after nine months from today if the trial does not register any progress.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) perwez U T