Patna High CourtCR. MISC./6181/2016rejected

Vicky Yadav @ Vicky Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2016-03-09Mr. Justice Shivaji Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.6181 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -42 Year- 2013 Thana -MASAURHI District- PATNA ====================================================== Vicky Yadav @ Vicky Kumar Son of Late Surendra Yadav, Resident of Barhari Tola Masaurhi, Police Station - Masaurhi, District - Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajendra Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. S.M.Rahman(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 09-03-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

In this case, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Masaurhi P.S. Case No.42 of 2013, corresponding to Sessions Trial No.1474 of 2013, registered for the offence punishable under section 364/34 of the Indian Penal Code and subsequently Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code was added.

Earlier, the petitioner has moved for bail in Criminal Miscellaneous No.49284 of 2015 and this Court vide order dated 16.03.2015 rejected the same with a liberty to renew the prayer for bail, if the trial is not concluded within nine months.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6181 of 2016 (3) dt.09-03-2016 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one Pappu Kumar, earlier whose bail was rejected, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 05.03.2015 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.44173 of 2015.

This Court had called for the status report form the Court below. It has been reported that three witnesses have been examined and still six witnesses are yet to be examined by the Court below.

In such view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected. However, the Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as early as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. (Shivaji Pandey, J) pawan/- U