Hardeo Prasad @ Hardeo Prasad Kushwaha @ Arbind Prasad Kushwaha @ Arbind Prasad @ Arvind Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.10557 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -142 Year- 2013 Thana -MADHUBAN DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Hardeo Prasad @ Hardeo Prasad Kushwaha @ Arbind Prasad Kushwaha @ Arbind Prasad @ Arvind Kumar son of Sheo Deyal Prasad, Resident of village- Kharsal Jogolia, P.S.- Madhuban, District- East Champaran .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate For the State : None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL ORDER 22-06-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears on behalf of the State.
Perused the report kept at flag 'C'.
It is contended on behalf of petitioner that two persons out of four accused have already been granted bail. However, Hardeo Prasad and co-accused Suresh Prasad have not been given such privilege. It is apparent from the order as contained in Annexure 3 that the bail was granted to co-accused Navin Prasad on the ground that the informant, in his further statement, recorded on the same date, i.e., the date of first information report being 6.8.2013, had stated that while Navin Prasad along with Devendra Prasad were standing, accused
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10557 of 2016 (5) dt.22-06-2016 2/2 Hardeo Prasad and Suresh Prasad had participated in act of severing the head of the deceased.
Accordingly, in view of the nature of allegation made against the petitioner, this Court does not find any reason to grant bail to the petitioner. From perusal of the report it appears that 5 prosecution witnesses out of 14 have already been examined. Accordingly, the Superintendent of Police, East Champaran is directed to take steps to ensure that the prosecution witnesses are produced on the date fixed during the trial. The court concerned is also directed to conclude the trial, without giving unnecessary adjournments, within a period of six months.
Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Superintendent of Police, East Champaran as well as the court below.
(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J) Spd/- U T