Purushottam Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

(FROM RESIDENTIAL OFFICE VIA VIDEO APPLICATION) CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10742 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-437 Year-2018 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== PURUSHOTTAM KUMAR YADAV, S/o Sri Rajendra Prasad Yadav, R/o village - Tintenga, P.O.- Tintenga, P.S.- Gopalpur, District- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Surendra Kumar, A.P.P.

For the Informant :

Mr. Dilip Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 21-08-2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove all the defects as pointed out by office within four weeks after start of normal functioning of the Court. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Surendra Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner in the present case is seeking regular bail in connection with Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 437 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Section 366A, 34, 364 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. The trial court's report says that all the prosecution witnesses have been examined, statement of the accused has been recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and the case is fixed

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10742 of 2021(3) dt.21-08-2021 2/2 for defence evidence.

Considering the nature of allegations and the materials on the record, this Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail particularly when the trial itself is likely to be concluded very soon. The trial court is expected to proceed with the trial on day to day basis, no unnecessary adjournment be granted to any of the parties and all endeavours be made to conclude the trial within a period of four months from the date of start of physical functioning of the court. If the trial still remains unconcluded for no reason attributable to the petitioner, he may renew his prayer for bail. The application stands disposed of accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) vats/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.