Rama Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.17167 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -195 Year- 2002 Thana -MEERGANJ District- GOPALGANJ ====================================================== Rama Manjhi, son of Baijnath Manjhi, resident of village - Badarjimi, P.S. Mirganj, Distt. Gopalganj.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Sandesh Roy For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. C.Jawahar(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3.

22-06-2016 Heard Sri Ram Sandesh Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Choudhary Jawahar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.

This is the 3rd attempt for grant of bail on behalf of petitioner. Earlier twice, the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected, in view of the fact that in a case registered under Section 302 of the I.P.C., the petitioner was the main assailant. On last occasion, while rejecting prayer for bail, the Court had noticed report received from the court below wherein it was indicated that out of nine witnesses, seven witnesses had already been examined.

In this case, vide order dated 04-05-2016, a report was again called for from the court below regarding stage of the case, which has been received and kept at flag 'B'. The report suggests

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17167 of 2016 (3) dt.22-06-2016 2/2 that from the last date, there is no progress in the case. Meaning thereby that out of nine witnesses, till date only seven witnesses have been examined. However, in the present report, the learned Trial Judge has observed that prosecution has already been directed to produce witnesses positively, failing which, the prosecution evidence will be closed.

In view of the fact that petitioner is the main assailant in a case registered under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, again I do not find any ground to review my earlier order. The prayer for bail again stands rejected.

The Court expects that learned Addl. Sessions Judge, in view of its report dated 10-05-2016, may take positive step so that trial may come to its logical end without any further delay. (Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay U T