Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37140/2019bail rejected

Randhir Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2019-11-20Mr. Justice Hemant Kumar Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37140 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2018 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur ====================================================== Randhir Kumar Singh Son of Ram Chandra Singh Resident of VillageGouspur, P.S.- Dalsingsarai, Distt.- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jitendra Narain Sinha, Sr. Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bharat Lal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 20-11-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Petitioner happens to be husband of the deceased and is languishing in jail custody since 18.05.2018. There is allegation against the petitioner that he committed dowry death of the deceased.

The report of learned trial court goes to show that charge against the petitioner was framed on 01.03.2019 and out of nine proposed prosecution witnesses, up till now, only two prosecution witnesses could be examined.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37140 of 2019(6) dt.20-11-2019 2/2 Submission on behalf of the petitioner is that petitioner is in jail custody since long but up till now, his trial could not be concluded.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail for the present and accordingly, his prayer for bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 26 of 2019 arising out of Dalsingsarai P.S. Case No. 94 of 2018 stands rejected.

However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and try to conclude the same as early as possible, preferably within nine months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. It is made clear that if the trial court fails to conclude the trial of the petitioner within the above stated period due to laches of the prosecution, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the learned trial court itself.

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) shahzad/- U T