Ashok Kumar Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar, Through The Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.250 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -null Year- null Thana -null District- PATNA =========================================================== Ashok Kumar Chaudhary S/o Ram Sakhi Chaudhary R/v - Kumhrar, P.S. AGam Kuan , District- Patna.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

2. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna

3. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna.

4. The Officer in charge of Alamganj Polcie Station , Patna. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Nivedita Nirvikar, G.A.-10 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 10-12-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2.

By way of the present application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks quashing of the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Alamganj P. S. Case No. 89 of 1999 registered under Sections 419, 420, 406, 470, 471, 472, 504, 323 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

It is contended that on merits, the petitioner has

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.250 of 2015 dt.10-12-2015 2/2 a very good case and the prosecution is delaying the trial without any rhyme and reason. It is further contended that since 2006, no witness has turned up.

4.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has contended that the petitioner is himself liable for the delay in trial. Whenever the witnesses appear before the Court, the accused has chosen not to appear as a result of which the bail bond of the petitioner was earlier cancelled by the Court below and he remained absconding for about two years. He has further contended that the petitioner had challenged the cognizance order before this Court, but he could not succeed.

5.

On perusal of the record, it would appear that the delay caused in completion of trial is due to the dilatory tactic of the petitioner. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any merit in this case. Accordingly, the writ application is dismissed.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.) Kanchan/- U T