Binay Paswan @ Vinay Paswan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38181 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2008 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya ====================================================== Binay Paswan @ Vinay Paswan Son of Late Rakshya Paswan, Resident of Village- Jaipur, Police Station- Sherghati, District - Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Shailesh Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bal Mukund Prasad Sinha, APP.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 23-09-2022 Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within two weeks from today.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual mode.
The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Barachatti P.S. Case No. 155 of 2008 (S.Tr. No.86/22/ 240/02), lodged under Sections 395, 412 of the Indian Penal Code. It is a case of the year 2008, in which bail was granted in the year 2010 by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The misuse of bail has been made since 2014 in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 22.05.2021, there are series of cases against the petitioner due to which he could not appear in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38181 of 2022(2) dt.23-09-2022 2/2 petitioner shall not misuse the bail again. On the point of criminal antecedent, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are in total 20 criminal cases pending against him and in all cases he is on bail except in serial no.2. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that due to the inaction on the part of petitioner, the trial of case of the year 2008 could not be concluded till date, even though petitioner was granted bail in the year 2010 itself.
In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, but hereby directing to the Trial Court to expedite the trial and conclude it within one year from the date of passing of this order.
With this observation, the bail application stands rejected.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.) ritik/- U T