Patna High CourtCR. MISC./4434/2015rejected

Pramod Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2015-04-29Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.4434 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -205 Year- 2013 Thana -AHIAPUR District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Pramod Kumar Son of Jawahar Sah @ Kailash Sah @ Kaushal Sah Resident of Mohalla - Laxmi Chowk Pawariya Tola, P.S. - Brahampura, District - Muzaffarpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Yadav For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anita Kumari (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 29-04-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is accused in connection with Sessions Trial No. 434 of 2013 arising out of Ahiyapur P.S. Case No. 205 of 2013 registered under sections 231, 232, 236, 238, 243, 420, 489(a), (b), (c), (d) and 120(b) of the I.P.C. pending in the Court of 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur. Earlier prayer of the petitioner was rejected vide Cr. Misc. No. 32525 of 2013 on 20.02.2014 by this Court on merit. At present, the petitioner is in custody since 09.04.2013, i.e. more than two years.

The report, as received vide letter no. 48 dated 17th

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4434 of 2015 (3) dt.29-04-2015 2/2 April, 2013 from the Court of 5th Addl. Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur, disclosed that the charge has been framed on 14.08.2013 and as yet total six witnesses have been examined in this case and one year more expected time is required for conclusion of the trial.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, I find no fresh ground to consider the prayer of the petitioner for bail. Accordingly, the application stands rejected. However, the Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of one year. If the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J.) Shail/- U T