Jitendra Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34409 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-135 Year-2016 Thana- WAJIRGANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== JITENDRA MANJHI Son of Lakhan Manjhi, Resident of Village - Dhandhar, P.S.- Wazirganj, District - Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Syed Asgher Najmi, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-12-2021 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Wazirganj P.S. Case No. 135/2016 instituted for the offences under Sections 304(B)/34, 302/34, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner has been filed this bail application in terms of the order dated 04.06.2020 in Cr. Misc. No.78829/2019 whereby this court while rejecting the bail application with a direction to the Trial Court to hold the trial on day to day basis and conclude the same within six months from the date of receipt of this order. Further the S.S.P., Gaya is directed to ensure that the attendance of the prosecution witnesses in the trial court so that the trial must be concluded within six months. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34409 of 2021(3) dt.06-12-2021 2/3 petitioner is in custody since 21.12.2016, he is a person with clean antecedents, charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that till dated in which three witnesses have been examined and four witnesses are yet to be examined and the petitioner as remained in custody on 21.12.2016 for more than five years. Learned APP for the State opposes the bail application and submits that from perusal of the record, it appears that the prosecution has examined three witnesses and out of two witnesses have supported the prosecution. Due to Pandemic Covid-19 the trial court could not proceed as such the trial court may be directed to conclude the trial within a fixed period.

Considering the facts that the petitioner is husband of the deceased, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected from the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Gaya, in connection with Wazirganj P.S. Case No. 135/2016, Sessions Trial No. 133/17/15/2019.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

However, the trial court is directed to ensure that the trial is expedited and concluded within a period of one year from today. If the trial is not concluded within a period of one

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34409 of 2021(3) dt.06-12-2021 3/3 year from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. (Satyavrat Verma, J) amitkumar/- U T