← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./23605/2017dismissed

Deepak Choudhary @ Deepak Kumar Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

2017-05-17Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.23605 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -91 Year- 2014 Thana -KUDHNI District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Deepak Choudhary @ Deepak Kumar Choudhary, son of Ram Pratap Choudhary, resident of village- Nimtalla Munger, P.S. Kotwali, DistrictMunger. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Hriday Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Arif, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 17-05-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Kurhani P.S. Case No. 91 of 2014, registered for offences punishable under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner has earlier moved this Court and his prayer for bail was rejected by order dated 16.1.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 794 of 2017 with the observation that he may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that now the charge has been framed in this case and the petitioner is in custody for about six months. Heard learned A.P.P. also who opposes the prayer for bail on the ground that the main allegation against this petitioner is that he used to engage the victim in flesh trade.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23605 of 2017 (2) dt.17-05-2017 2/2 Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The prayer is rejected. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and, if possible, conduct the same on day to day basis and the Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarpur is also directed to ensure the production of the witnesses in the court on the date fixed so that the trial is concluded within a period of one year.

As such, the application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) S.Pandey/- U T