Premdhar Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.14018 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -19 Year- 2013 Thana -MANER District- PATNA ====================================================== Premdhar Rai S/o Late Chandrika Rai, R/o Village Nakta Diyara, P.S. Digha, Dist- Patna, Presently Residing at Haripur Colony, Near Railway Line, P.O. Digha, P.S.- Digha, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prakash Chandra Agrawal For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Anurag Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 27-07-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner is accused in connection with Maner P.S. Case No. 19 of 2013 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 447, 341, 323, 302, 379, 504 and 506 of the I.P.C. and section 27 of the Arms Act.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that prayer of the petitioner for bail has already been rejected thrice; lastly on 05.08.2015 vide Cr. Misc. No. 33446 of 2015 with observation to the Trial Court to conclude the trial of the petitioner expeditiously by taking all effective steps, but uptill-now only three witnesses have been examined, out of 14 witnesses. The last witness has been examined on 12.06.2016.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14018 of 2016 (4) dt.27-07-2016 2/2 The report, as received from the Court of Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Danapur vide Letter No. 107 dated 22.04.2016, revealed that the Court was vacant due to transfer of Presiding Officer and till 22.04.2016 two witnesses have been examined.

Learned counsel appearing for the informant submits that he will produce the remaining witnesses for examination before Court within six months.

The prayer of the petitioner for bail was rejected thrice taking into consideration of allegation of causing assault to the deceased through fire arm. As such, I am not inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioner for bail.

However, Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner within a period of one year by taking all effective steps. If the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Shail/- U T