Ram Pravesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.21212 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -143 Year- 2013 Thana -PARSAUNI District- SITAMARHI ====================================================== Ram Pravesh Kumar son of Mahesh Raut, resident of village- Shitalpatti, P.S.- Piparahi, District Sheohar.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Birendra Kumar, Advocate Mr. Bimal Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mukesh Kr. Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-07-2016 Heard.

The prayer for bail of the petitioner in a criminal prosecution registered under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code as also under Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 was rejected earlier by this Court by order dated 26.05.2015 passed in Cr.Misc.No. 12013 of 2015. in view of the allegation that the petitioner is alleged to have committed rape on the point of knife on a minor girl. By order dated 18.05.2016 a report regarding status of the trial of the petitioner was called for from the trial court which has been received and is kept at Flag-A. From the aforesaid report it appears that the charge against the petitioner has been framed and out of 11 chargesheet witnesses, only one witness has been examined till date. However, the learned trial court has reported that the trial of the petitioner is likely to be concluded within a period of six months.

In view of the a foresaid report and in view of the fact

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21212 of 2016 (3) dt.13-07-2016 2/2 that the trial of the petitioner is going on, the prayer for bail of the petitioner in connection with Trial No. 01 of 2014 arising out of Parsauni P.S.Case No. 143 of 2013 pending in the court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi is rejected once again. However, the trial court is directed to take up the trial of the petitioner on priority basis and make all endeavour to conclude the same within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and if the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within the aforesaid period of time, then the petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. (Birendra Prasad Verma, J) Tahir/- U T