← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./34405/2016rejected

Raghwesh Raghav v. The State Of Bihar

2016-08-31Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 34405 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -514 Year- 2014 Thana -BEGUSARAI TOWN District- BEGUSARAI ====================================================== Raghwesh Raghav Son of late Mithilesh Chaudhary Resident of VillageParihara, P.S. Bakhri, District Begusarai. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Karandeep Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Sri Sunil Kumar Pandey(APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 31-08-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. representing the State.

The petitioner wants to renew the prayer of bail which was earlier rejected by order dated 15.03.2016 passed in Cri. Misc. No. 2824 of 2016, on the ground that the petitioner is in custody since 01.12.2015. The trial has not been concluded as yet and in near future, it is not likely to be concluded. Up till now only three prosecution witnesses have been examined and all have turned hostile. The prosecution story is not probable and reliable and as such, petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration, to which the learned A.P.P seriously opposes.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, at present finding no good ground for reconsideration of prayer of bail, again

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34405 of 2016 (2) dt.31-08-2016 2/2 the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected in connection with S. Tr. No. 418 of 2016 arising out of Begusarai (Town) P.S. Case No. 514 of 2014 pending in the court of learned Additional District Judge, Begusarai However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within three months after keeping the same on day to day basis, failing which if the petitioner at no fault, may be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Rajiv/- U T