Rana Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1696 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2018 Thana- DHARHARA District- Munger ====================================================== RANA YADAV Son of Ramadhar Yadav R/V-Bari Govindpur, PS- Dharhara, Dist- Munger, State- Bihar ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Meera Devi Wife of late Vijay Tanti R/o Sarobag, PS- Dharhara, DistMunger, State- Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Amit Narayan For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Binay Krishna ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 24-08-2023

1. The present appeal is an example of as to how two accused together can obstruct the trial of the case.

2. Sessions Trial No. 24 of 2019 under section 302/34, 364/34, 201/34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code was pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Munger. In light of the direction of the Patna High Court, the trial was to be concluded within 6 months. The trial court, working efficiently, recorded the evidence and statements within the stipulated time and the trial was fixed for argument.

3. Co-accused Matuki Yadav filed an application before the court of Sessions Judge that the deceased was a member of the Scheduled Caste, so the trial should be

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1696 of 2023 dt.24-08-2023 2/3 conducted in the court of the Special Judge, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe.

4. It is worth mentioning that this application was not filed by the prosecution, but the Sessions Judge, without considering this point that the application was given only for the purpose of delaying the trial, accepted the same and transferred the trial to the Special Court.

5. In the special court the charges were amended accordingly and charges were also framed under section 3(2) (v) of the SC/ST (POA) Act.

6. An application was filed by Matuki Yadav under section 217 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the effect that since charges have been amended, so all the witnesses should be be recalled.

7. The Special Judge, keeping in view the direction of the Hon'ble High Court, rejected the application.

8. Being aggrieved, the co-accused Rana Yadav (Not Matuki Yadav), filed the present appeal against the aforesaid order.

9. When an application was filed by co-accused Matuki Yadav that the trial be transferred to the Special Court, the accused Rana Yadav was not aggrieved although this

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1696 of 2023 dt.24-08-2023 3/3 application was affecting him adversely. But on rejection of the application under section 217 Cr. P.C. he felt that he was being adversely affected and filed the present appeal.

10. From the aforesaid facts it is clear that on one hand the accused Matuki Yadav initially filed an application for transfer of the case to the Special Court and thereafter files an application for recall of the witnesses and on the other hand the accused Rana Yadav has filed the present appeal challenging the refusal of the prayer for recall of the witnesses whereas it was accused Matuki Yadav whose prayer for recall of the witnesses was rejected. It appears that both the accused persons, having hands together, are tactfully trying to delay the trial of the case. It is a clear case of abuse of the process of law. 11.

Having considered the facts stated hereinabefore, I am not inclined to interfere with the order impugned. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. (Arvind Srivastava, J) mcv/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date