Karanveer Yadav @ Karamveer Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31128 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-285 Year-2018 Thana- NAYA RAM NAGAR District- Munger ====================================================== Karanveer Yadav @ Karamveer Yadav, S/O Kameshwari Yadav, R/o villageHerudiyara, Kalisthan, P.S.- Naya Ram Nagar (O.P. Safiasarai), DistrictMunger ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjeeb Kumar Sanju, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 28-07-2021 As prayed for, let the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within four weeks of starting of the Court proceeding in physical mode in normal course.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State through Video Conferencing. The petitioner is accused in connection with Sessions Trial No. 96 of 2020 arising out of Naya Ram Nagar Safiasarai (O.P.) P.S. Case No. 285 of 2018, registered under Section 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, Munger.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prayer for bail of the petitioner, who is the husband of the deceased,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31128 of 2021(2) dt.28-07-2021 2/2 was earlier rejected on merit vide order dated 18.02.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 67564 of 2019 by this Court. Further submission is that while four witnesses have been examined during trial but they have not supported the prosecution case and he is in custody since 11.07.2019.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, I find no ground to reconsider the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected. However, the trial court 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 aforesaid period of six months, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail Bhardwaj/- (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) U T