Patna High CourtCR. MISC./30330/2019bail rejected

Chunni Lal Soren v. The State Of Bihar

2020-02-19Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30330 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2015 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Banka ====================================================== Chunni Lal Soren, Son of Late Guru Soren Resident of Village - Akaia, P.S.- Fullidumar, District- Banka ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uday Chand Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 19-02-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Banka Mahila P.S. Case No. 53 of 2015, registered under Sections 376 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4, 8 and 12 of POCSO Act, pending in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Banka.

Accusation is of committing rape by two persons upon the informant and her minor daughter. In course of investigation, the petitioner was identified by daughter of informant.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and he is in custody since 18.11.2015.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30330 of 2019(5) dt.19-02-2020 2/2 A report, as called for, has been received from the Court of learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge-I, Banka through Letter No. 189, dated 25.10.2019, which indicates that after concluding the evidence, the record is fixed for argument and he expected that the trial of the petitioner may be concluded within three months.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, bail prayer of the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

However, learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge-I, Banka is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner within six months by taking all effective steps. If the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within the aforesaid period of six months, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T