Amarnath Deep @ Amar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar Through The C.B.I, Patna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.29166 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -230 Year- 1998 Thana -KHAZANIHAT District- PURNIA ======================================================
1. Amarnath Deep @ Amar Yadav Son of late Shobhanath Yadav Resident of Village- Maranga, P.O. Maranga, P.S K. Hat, District Purnea. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Through The C.b.i, Patna .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bipin Kumar Sinha(SC,CBI) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 25-01-2017 Heard.
It is shocking to see that the petitioner is languishing in jail custody for more than 12 years and charge against him was framed on 10-05-2006 but even after lapse of near about 10 years, CBI could not conclude its evidence.
Earlier the petitioner approached this court for grant of bail but, this court refused to release him on bail vide order dated 09-12-2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 30273 of 2015. However, at the time of passing of order dated 09-12-2015 in Cr. Misc. No. 30273 of 2015, the learned counsel of CBI had informed this court that only three prosecution witnesses have been left to be examined and the aforesaid prosecution witnesses would be examined within a very short span of time and, taking note of the aforesaid submission of learned counsel of CBI, this court directed the trial court to expedite the trial of the petitioner
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29166 of 2016 (4) dt.25-01-2017 2/2 on priority basis, even by taking his trial on day-to-day basis but learned trial court has reported vide letter No. 5 dated 02-01-2017 that uptill now, 31 prosecution witnesses have already been examined and the case is still pending for recording the evidence of prosecution witnesses.
Earlier, on merit, prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by the Apex Court vide order dated 13-10-2014 passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Cri) No. 5818 o 2014. Therefore, in the aforesaid circumstance, on merit there is no scope for this court to extend the privilege of bail to the petitioner and therefore, taking note of the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submission of the parties, prayer for bail of the petitioner is, again rejected.
However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner in the manner, as directed by this court vide order dated 09-12-2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 30273 of 2015 and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably, within three months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. Any deviation from direction, given by this court shall be viewed seriously.
(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) A.K.V./- U T