Patna High CourtCR. MISC./33915/2016rejected

Rajiv Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

2016-09-07Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.33915 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -54 Year- 2012 Thana -MANSURCHAK District- BEGUSARAI ====================================================== Rajiv Chaudhary, Son of late Harinandan Chaudhary, Resident of VillageGodhna, P.S. Bachhwara, District Begusarai. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Abhay Kumar - 1, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 07-09-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mansoorchak P.S. Case No.54 of 2012 registered under Sections 307, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of Sessions Judge, Begusarai. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier, the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 14.01.2015 passed in Criminal Misc. No. 46893 of 2014 on merit. The petitioner is in custody since 22.09.2012, but till today the trial has not been commenced as yet.

The report as called for vide order dated 24.08.2016 has been received from the court of Addl. Sessions Judge-VI, Begusarai vide letter No. 205, dated 31.08.2016, which shows

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.33915 of 2016 (4) dt.07-09-2016 2/2 that the record is fixed on 15.09.2016 for framing of the charge and production warrant has been issued against the petitioner, who is in Bhagalpur Central Jail.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to reconsider the bail prayer of the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of bail is again rejected. However, the learned Court below is directed to take effective stapes to conclude the trial of the petitioner within one year.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T