Ramdeo Yadav @ Matla v. The State Of Bihar
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3284 of 2015 (3) dt.18-02-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.3284 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -173 Year- 2013 Thana -SONO District- JAMUI ======================================================
1. Ramdeo Yadav @ Matla Son of Biltu Yadav Resident of vill-Sono,P.SSono,Distt.-Jamui .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md.Sufiyan (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 18-02-2015 Report has been received from the court below which goes to reveal that charge has been framed in the case on 2.7.2014 but not a single witness has been produced by the prosecution side.
The petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail which has already been rejected vide order dated 14.7.2014 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 16093 of 2014 on the ground that the trial has not been concluded and the petitioner is suffering in custody since 30.11.2013, and as such, the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration as during investigation some of the witnesses have stated that during Shiv Charha the victim and the petitioner used to talk with each other and the victim was a consenting party. Considering the fact that there is no progress in the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3284 of 2015 (3) dt.18-02-2015 trial and as such the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge III, Jamui in S. T. No. 63 of 2014 arising out of Sono P.S. Case No. 173 of 2013, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T