Khesari Rai @ Hareram Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36349 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-55 Year-2022 Thana- DARIYAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== KHESARI RAI @ HARERAM RAI Son of Vakil Rai Residence of village - Akilpur, P.S.- Dariyapur, District - Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ritesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jagdhar Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 19-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State as also the informant.

Let the defect(s), if any, as pointed out by the office, be removed within four weeks.

The case is registered under sections 302, 201, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Session Trial No. 204 of 2022 arising out of Dariyapur P.S. Case No. 55 of 2022.

As per the FIR, the informant has alleged that his elder son was taken away by the accused persons including the petitioner herein on the motorcycle. Before checking out he had informed that he is going to withdraw some amount from CSP branch. As he failed to return, subsequently, it is alleged that the accused persons came in search of his son, stating that decamped with their motorcycle. Later, upon information, the informant reached the place of occurrence and found his son having been brutally assaulted and he succumbed to the injuries

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36349 of 2022(2) dt.19-09-2022 2/2 thereafter. The last allegation is that the informant's son was having business dealing with the petitioner herein and there was some dispute due to money transaction which led to the present occurrence.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that save and except his presence as last seen, nothing has come on record.

The learned counsel for the informant on the other hand submits that the police on the investigation has found complicity of this petitioner along with the other accused and they were seen coming from the place of occurrence in an inebriated condition. His last submission is that charges have been framed and one of the witness has already been examined. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court for the present is not inclined to grant him the privilege of bail as the trial is already on.

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within a period of nine months. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/Ajay Singh U T