Pramod Kumar @ Pramod Yadav @ Pramod Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21673 of 2015 (2) dt.13-05-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.21673 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -220 Year- 2014 Thana -NAUBATPUR District- PATNA ======================================================
1. Pramod Kumar @ Pramod Yadav @ Pramod Kumar Yadav Son of Sri Subhash Yadav resident of village - Tarwan, P.S. Naubatpur, District - Patna .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arbind Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Zainul Abedin (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 13-05-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.
The petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail which has already been rejected vide order dated 24.12.2014 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 32090 of 2014 on the ground that the petitioner is suffering in custody since 08.05.214 and in future there is no likelihood of conclusion of trial. The father of the petitioner has lodged a Sanha before Naubatpur Police Station vide annexure-3 which was filed on 2.5.2014 and thereafter, on 7.5.2014, this case has been lodged. The victim girl has given tutored statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. The doctor has found no injury either external or internal and her age has been assessed between 17 to
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21673 of 2015 (2) dt.13-05-2015 19 years to which the learned APP opposes.
As the victim girl has supported the allegation of her kidnapping by the petitioner and keeping her confined, as such, at present this Court is not inclined to reconsider the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 220 of 2014. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same, preferably within three months, failing which the petitioner may be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T