Ashish Kumar Srivastava @ Ashish @ Guddu v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29736 of 2017 (2) dt.26-07-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.29736 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -594 Year- 2015 Thana -BETTIAH CITY DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ====================================================== Ashish Kumar Srivastava @ Ashish @ Guddu, S/o Late Shambhoo Prasad Srivastava, Resident of Village- Madhopur, P.S.- Majhaulia, District- West Champaran, at presently residing at Mohalla- New Colony, Dakbangla Road, Bettiah, P.S.- Bettiah Town, District- West Champaran. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nafisuzzoha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Mukeshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 26-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP representing the State.

The petitioner wants to renew his prayer of bail, which was earlier rejected twice vide order dated 22.06.2016 and 14.12.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 13915 of 2016 and 44383 of 2016 respectively, on the ground that the petitioner is suffering in custody since 04.11.2015. The petitioner has not given wrong address either before the Police or in his bail petition before the learned court below and also not before this court rather he has given correct address. Up-till now the trial has not been concluded and the petitioner was given liberty to renew his prayer of bail if the trial is not concluded within six months. Learned APP duly assisted by learned counsel for the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29736 of 2017 (2) dt.26-07-2017 informant opposes the prayer of bail by submitting that the petitioner prepared video clips from mobile regarding killing of the deceased and demanded ransom from Abhay Kumar Soni, the owner of S.K. Jewelers.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, finding no good ground for reconsideration of prayer for bail of the petitioner, again his prayer for bail stands rejected in Sessions Trial No. 380 of 2016 pending in the court of learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, West Champaran at Bettiah.

However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order after taking the same on priority basis and if possible, on day to day basis, failing which, the petitioner, if at no fault, may be at liberty to renew his prayer of bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T