Munna Singh @ Radhey Shyam Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.48104 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -60 Year- 1989 Thana -KARJA District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Munna Singh @ Radhey Shyam Singh S/o Yamuna Singh, resident of village- Ufraulia, P.S.- Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vindhya Keshari Singh, Sr.Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umanath Mishra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER -------------- 20-02-2015 Heard the parties.

The petitioner seeks bail in a criminal prosecution registered under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Taking into consideration the fact that there is allegation of firing against the petitioner in the FIR vide Annexure- 1 and further taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner remained absconding for last several years, this Court is not inclined to accede to the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 217 of 1990 arising out of Karja P.,S.Case No. 60 of 1989 pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge 2nd, Muzaffarpur. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected. Learned senior counsel points out that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 30.03.2014.

In above view of the matter, the learned trial court is hereby directed to take up the trial of the petitioner on priority basis. If the charge has not been framed against the petitioner, the same must be framed without any further delay and all endeavours

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48104 of 2014 (2) dt.20-02-2015 2/2 shall be made to conclude the trial of the petitioner within a maximum period of one year from the date of framing of charge. However, if the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within the aforesaid period of time, without there being any fault on the part of the petitioner, he shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. (Birendra Prasad Verma, J) Tahir/- U T