Vivekanand Singh @ Vivekanand Pahalwan @ Bibekanand Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.42317 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -453 Year- 1995 Thana -BARH District- PATNA =========================================================== Vivekanand Singh @ Vivekanand Pahalwan @ Bibekanand Singh, son of Late Krishna Baldeo Singh, resident of village - Nadma, P.S. Barh, District - Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. B.N. Pandey, A.P.P. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 28-03-2018 1.

This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the order dated 19.09.2014 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Barh, in Sessions Trial No. 61 of 2005, Sessions Trial No. 1067 of 1996 and Sections Trial No. 935 of 2008 by which the learned Sessions Judge has rejected the petition of the petitioner dated 14.07.2014 to amalgamate Sessions Trial No. 1067A of 1996 with Sessions Trial No. 61 of 2005, 935 of 2008 and 1067 of 1996. 2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

3.

Learned Sessions Judge has mentioned in detail about the conduct of this petitioner who is only trying to obstruct

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42317 of 2014 dt.28-03-2018 2/2 smooth disposal of trial by filing such petition. 4.

The court below has rejected the petition of the petitioner by reasoned order. The court below has mentioned in the impugned order that it does not find any merit in the petition to amalgamate Sessions Trial No. 1067A of 1996 in original Sessions Trial No. 61 of 2005. It is mentioned in the impugned order that original Sessions Trial No. 61 of 2005 is in progress and witness have been examined in the Trial whereas Sessions Trial No. 1067A of 1996 is pending for evidence after framing of charge. 5.

Therefore, this Court does not find any merit in the application.

6.

The application stands dismissed.

7.

The court below is directed to proceed in the trial in accordance with law.

(Sanjay Priya, J) S.Ali/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 04/04/2018 Transmission Date 04/04/2018