Niranjan Sao v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 55120 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-671 Year-2015 Thana- Lakhisarai District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Niranjan Sao Son of Dular Sao Resident of Village - Ram Nagar, Mankattha, P.S. and District Lakhisarai.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Uma Kant Shukla Mr. Shakti Suman Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Damodar Pd. Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3.

06-12-2017 Heard Sri Uma Kant Shukla, learned counsel assisted by Sri Shakti Suman Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Damodar Prasad Tiwary, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. This is the 3rd attempt for grant of bail on behalf of the petitioner, who is in custody in Lakhisarai P.S. Case No. 671 of 2015.

By order dated 22-11-2017, a report was called for from the court below regarding stage of the case, which has been received and kept at flag 'A'. The report suggests that out of 17 (seventeen) witnesses, 3 (three) witnesses have already been produced and examined. Meaning thereby that trial is going on. Sri Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no change in the position, which was existing on the last date of rejection of prayer for bail of petitioner.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55120 of 2017(3) dt.06-12-2017 2/2 Considering the fact that petitioner is in custody, it is necessary to direct the trial court as well as prosecution to take all steps for early disposal of the case.

So far as renewal of prayer for bail is concerned, earlier the prayer for bail of petitioner was rejected on two counts. Firstly, allegation in the case and secondly, criminal antecedents of the petitioner. On perusal of fact stated in the petition, it is evident that petitioner is accused in altogether 9 (nine) cases relating to serious offences.

In view of facts and circumstances, there is no reason to review my earlier order.

The prayer for bail again stands rejected.

However, while dismissing, it is desirable to observe that trial court as well as prosecution may take appropriate step for early disposal of the case.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned Superintendent of Police for production of witnesses, as and when required by the trial court.

(Rakesh Kumar, J.) anay U T