Patna High CourtCR. APP (SJ)/1832/2021dismissed

Chhotu Ram @ Vikash Ram @ Shubh Kumar Raj v. The State Of Bihar

2021-08-25Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1832 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2018 Thana- BETTIAH CITY District- West Champaran ====================================================== Chhotu Ram @ Vikash Ram @ Shubh Kumar Raj S/O Jaleshwar Ram R/O Village- Ambedkar Nagar, Baswariya, P.S.- Bettiah Town, District- West Champaran ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Ravi Bhardwaj For the Respondent/s :

Ms. Ushan Kumari No. 1, Sp. PP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 25-08-2021 Heard the parties through virtual court proceedings. Vide order dated 28.07.2021, report was called for from the court of learned 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge-cumSpecial Judge (SC/ST), West Champaran at Bettiah in Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 46 of 2018 regarding stage of trial in the present case which is received and tagged as Flag "K" to this appeal. In compliance thereof, a report dated 02.08.2021 sent by the learned 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (SC/ST), West Champaran at Bettiah has been received and at Flag "K" to this appeal. Learned Judge, apart from the other facts, has stated that due to CORONA Pandemic phase 2, this court is functioning on virtual mode only which may cuase delay in recording of evidence. This case is fixed for supply of police paper and framing of charge at this stage and if court starts to function in physical mode

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1832 of 2021(3) dt.25-08-2021 2/2 in that situation matter will be concluded within six months of such functioning of the court.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

However, the learned Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. If the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period, as aforesaid, the appellant would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) GAURAV S./- U T