Vishwa Vijay Singh @ Vishwavijay v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26755 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2015 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== VISHWA VIJAY SINGH @ VISHWAVIJAY Son of Ram Suresh Singh Resident of Village - Fatehpur, P.S.- Raghopur, District - Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajit Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 26-06-2019 Heard the parties.

Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court, vide order dated 4.4..2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No.10291 of 2017 and order dated 21.6.2018 passed in Cr. Misc. No.26342 of 2018.

Allegation against the petitioner is of firing on the abdomen of the deceased and there is allegation against the other accused person of firing .

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention towards annexure 4 series and submitted that several other accused persons have been granted bail in this case. The petitioner is in custody for about 2 1⁄2 years and there is no substantive progress in the trial.

Heard learned A.P.P. and from perusal of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26755 of 2019(4) dt.26-06-2019 2/2 record it appears that the persons who have been grated bail against them there is allegation of firing on the leg and the injuries were found on the leg and further it appears that the case is fixed for evidence but due to the fact that the application has been filed for production of the witnesses in special security, progress of trial is withheld.

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, however, since the petitioner is in custody for more than 2 1⁄2 years, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it as soon as possible. At the same time, the S.P., Vaishali at Hajipur is directed to produce the witnesses in the court even if it is required for producing in special security so that the trial may be concluded as expeditiously as possible.

With the aforesaid direction, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U T