Patna High CourtCR. MISC./14097/2018disposed

Rajesh Goswami @ Raghu Goswami v. The State Of Bihar

2018-04-18Mr. Justice Hemant Kumar Srivastava2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14097 of 2018 (3) dt.18-04-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.14097 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -41 Year- 2015 Thana -OBRA District- AURANGABAD ======================================================

1. Rajesh Goswami @ Raghu Goswami, Son of Narsingh Goswami, Resident of Village- Shankarpur, P.S.- Obra, District- Aurangabad (Bihar). .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bachan Jee Ojha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dinesh Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 18.04.2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. Earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by this court taking nature of the allegation levelled against him but submission on behalf of the petitioner is that the petitioner is in jail custody since 12.5.2015 and up till now, his trial has not been concluded. It is also submitted that the petitioner is suffering from serious eye disease and no proper arrangement has been made for the treatment of his eye.

. Trial court vide letter no. 43/2018 dated 10.4.2018 has reported that only I.O has been left to be examined. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14097 of 2018 (3) dt.18-04-2018 as well as submissions of the parties, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail and, again, his prayer for bail in connection with Session trial no. 458/2015 + 23/2015 + 458A/2015 + 20/2016 arising out of Obra P.S. Case no. 41/2015 pending in the court of Addl. Sessions Judge I, Aurangabad stands rejected.

However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and conclude the same as early as possible preferably, within four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Furthermore, the concerned Jail authorities are directed to take proper steps for treatment of eye of the petitioner.

Let copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail authorities for needful.

shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J) U T