Mithilesh Kumar Paswan @ Mithilesh Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.14163 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-256 Year-2015 Thana- PUPRI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Mithilesh Kumar Paswan @ Mithilesh Paswan, S/o Chalitar Paswan @ Chalitar Kumar Paswan, resident of Village- Madhupur (Madhpur Mabbi), P.S.- Darbhanga Sadar, District- Darbhanga.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shiva Shankar Sharma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP-162 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 21-03-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner wants to renew his prayer of bail, which was earlier rejected twice vide order dated 30.03.2016 and 03.05.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. Nos. 5258 of of 2016 and 15040 of 2017 respectively, on the ground that the petitioner is in custody since 17.10.2015, he has not been put on test identification parade, the recovered mobile has also not been put on test identification parade, co-accused Jitendra Ram has been allowed bail, only two prosecution witnesses have been examined and both have turned hostile and as such the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration.

Learned APP seriously opposes the prayer of bail by

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14163 of 2018(2) dt.21-03-2018 2/2 submitting that from possession of the petitioner one looted mobile was recovered which is mentioned in paragraph 52 of the case diary.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, finding no good ground for reconsideration of the prayer of bail of the petitioner, again his such prayer stands rejected in S. Tr. No. 306 of 2016 arising out of Pupri P. S. Case No. 256 of 2015 pending in the court of learned F.T.C. II, Sitamarhi. However, learned trial court is again directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

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