Rupa Panjikar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22143 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2019 Thana- BATH District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== RUPA PANJIKAR W/o Ajay Kumar Panjikar Resident of Village - Kaitha, P.s.- Shambhuganj, Distt.- Banka.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate Mr. Pravin Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 22-06-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within four weeks. In the eventuality of nonremoval of defects within undertaken period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.

This is the second attempt of the petitioner to approach before this Court for bail. Earlier, vide order dated 13.01.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 68403 of 2019, the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected.

Vide order dated 11.05.2022, a report was called for from the learned Court below regarding the stage of the trial and the time likely to be taken in conclusion of the trial. In

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22143 of 2022(3) dt.22-06-2022 2/2 compliance thereof, a report dated 18.05.2022 has been sent by the learned A.D.J.-X, Bhagalpur which is at Flag 'R' to this application. In his report, the learned Judge has, inter alia, stated that the trial of this case is likely to be concluded within six months.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for bail is hereby once again rejected.

The learned Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six months. If the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T