Patna High CourtCR. MISC./28571/2016rejected

Prasant Kumar Jha @ Prasant Jha v. The State Of Bihar

2016-09-07Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 28571 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -3 Year- 2012 Thana -MAHILA P.S. District- PATNA ====================================================== Prasant Kumar Jha @ Prasant Jha Son of Prabhakar Jha Resident of Hawai Adda Colony Quarter No. 2, P.S. Hawai Adda, District Patna. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Thakur, Advocate, Mr. Pravin Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Madhura Nand Jha (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 07-09-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner wants to renew his prayer of bail, which was earlier rejected vide order dated 03.12.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 29506 of 2015, on the ground that the petitioner is in custody since 30.07.2012. The victim has implicated the petitioner only with a view to put pressure so that he can marry with her. Other co-accused Dinesh Paswan, Rahul Lamba and Shushant Kuamr have been allowed bail, and as such, the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration as he has got no criminal antecedent.

Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail by submitting that he is the main accused, as he has called the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28571 of 2016 (3) dt.07-09-2016 2/2 informant and committed gang rape with her.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected.

However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same preferably within four months keeping the same on priority basis, considering the detention of the petitioner, failing which if the petitioner at no fault, may be at liberty to renew the prayer for bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Rajiv/- U T