Md. Afaque @ Afak @ Md. Ashfaque v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40780 of 2016 (3) dt.07-12-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.40780 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -232 Year- 2013 Thana -ARARIA District- ARRARIA ====================================================== Md. Afaque @ Afak @ Md. Ashfaque, Son of Taiyab, Resident of VillageChandardaiee, P.S.- Araria, District- Araria. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Naushad Uzzoha, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Shyameshwar Dayal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 07-12-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner is accused in connection with Sessions Trial No. 232 of 2014 arising out of Araria P.S. Case No. 232 of 2013 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 452, 323, 324, 307, 302, 380, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Araria.

A report regarding the present stage of trial has been received through letter no. 263 dated 28.09.2016, from the court of 3rd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Araria, which shows that up till now altogether eight witnesses including the informant and one Investigating Officer have been examined and one nonofficial witness, two Investigating Officers and the Doctor

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40780 of 2016 (3) dt.07-12-2016 are yet to be examined and the trial court expected that the trial will conclude within six months.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected twice on merit and lastly vide order dated 06.05.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 19765 of 2015 by this Court. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 19.05.2014.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, I find no ground to reconsider the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

However, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner within six months by taking all effective steps. If the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within aforesaid period of six months, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

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