Rajesh Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.9941 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -67 Year- 2015 Thana -DIGHWARA District- SARAN ====================================================== Rajesh Kumar Yadav son of Shri Moti Lal Yadav @ Moti Lal Rai resident of village - Kanhauli, Plice Station - Basantpur, District - Siwan .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 16-03-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned A.P.P. representing the State and the learned counsel for the informant.

The petitioner wants to renew his prayer of bail which was earlier rejected vide order dated 12.10.2015 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 26217 of 2015 on the ground that the petitioner is suffering in custody since 24.04.2015 and now, charges have already been framed on 09.12.2015, and as such, the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration as in near future, the trial is not likely to be concluded. The learned APP duly assisted by the learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer of bail by submitting that the trial is going on and within four months the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9941 of 2016 (3) dt.16-03-2016 2/2 trial is likely to be concluded and as such release of the petitioner will hamper the trial and there is very likelihood that the petitioner with the aid of his associates will tamper the prosecution evidence. Recently, the prayer of bail of co-accused Shahabuddin has also been rejected by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, finding no good ground for reconsideration of prayer of bail, again, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected in connection with Dighwara P.S. Case No. 67 of 2015 pending in the court of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-V, Chapra, District-Saran.

However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same preferably within four months, after taking the same on day to day basis, failing which, the petitioner may be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) ajaypd./- U T