Surendra Yadav @ Baban Yadav @ Baban @ Bauna v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2633 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2019 Thana- PAKARIBARAW District- Nawada ====================================================== Surendra Yadav @ Baban Yadav @ Baban @ Bauna Son Of Prasadi Yadav R/O Village- Morma, P.S.- Roh, Dist.- Nawada ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr.Rakesh Kumar Shrivastava For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Sadanand Paswan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 24-03-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This is an appeal under section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, (hereinafter in short referred to as the 'SC/ST Act') against the refusal of prayer for bail vide order dated 02.03.2021, passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-1st, Nawada cum Special Judge, Nawada in connection with Special Case No. 16 of 2019 arising out of Pakaribarawan P.S. Case No. 29 of 2019, registered under Sections 302, 201/34 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
In pursuance to the order dated 17.11.2021, status report of trial in connection with the aforesaid case has been received, in which it is reported that uptil now out of nine charge-sheeted witnesses, two witnesses have been examined, cross examined and discharged. Next date fixed is 29.11.2021
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2633 of 2021(3) dt.24-03-2022 2/2 for evidence.
Considering the present stage of the trial, I am not inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail. Accordingly, his payer for bail is rejected in connection with Special Case No. 16 of 2019 arising out of Pakaribarawan P.S. Case No. 29 of 2019 pending before the court of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-1st cum Special Judge, Nawada. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. However, Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within a period of nine months from the date of initiation of normal physical proceeding and /or through Video Conferencing and S. S.P., Nawada is directed to ensure production of the witnesses in the case on each and every date fixed without fail.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) devendra/- U T