Chandra Bhusan Tiwari @ Bullet Tiwari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.3044 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -112 Year- 1998 Thana -GOVINDGANJ DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Chandra Bhusan Tiwari @ Bullet Tiwari, Son of Sri Ramadhar Tiwari @ Sadhu Tiwari R/o Village - Khajuria, P.S. - Malahi, District - East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Surendra Kishore Thakur For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 22-03-2017 Heard Sri Surendra Kishore Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner, Dr. Ajeet Kumar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as well as Sri Karandeep, learned counsel, who has voluntarily appeared on behalf of the informant. This is the second attempt for grant of bail on behalf of the petitioner within a short span of time. Earlier, the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected on 11.04.2016 vide Cr.Misc. No.6995 of 2016. The petitioner is in custody since 29.09.2015 in Govindganj P.S. Case no.112/1998 registered for the offence under Sections 304(B), 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Earlier the prayer for bail was rejected on two counts; firstly the petitioner was the husband and secondly he remained absconder for several years.

In this case, by order dated 15.02.2017, a report was

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3044 of 2017 (3) dt.22-03-2017 2/2 called for from the court below regarding stage of the case, which has been received and kept at Flag-A. The report dated 04.03.2017 suggests that earlier the case was fixed for appearance of one of the co-accused. However, the case of the petitioner was separated and charge was framed and summons has been issued for ensuring attendance of the witnesses. Keeping in view the fact that only in the month of April, 2016 the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected and also on the fact that charge has already been framed, there is no reason to review my earlier order. The petition stand dismissed. While dismissing the present petition, it is desirable to observe that the trial court may take appropriate steps for early disposal of the case. The informant, who has already appeared before this Court through his counsel, is also required to render full co-operation before the trial court for early disposal of the case.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned Superintendent of Police for ensuring production of witnesses as and when required by the trial court.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U T