Subodh Dubey @ Ajay Kumar Dwivedi v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25260 of 2017 (2) dt.12-07-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.25260 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -270 Year- 2015 Thana -BAHERI District- DARBHANGA ====================================================== Subodh Dubey @ Ajay Kumar Dwivedi Son of Late Narmdeshwar Dwivedi Resident of Village-Khiriyaghat, P.s.-Bairiya, District-West Champaran .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Anisur Rahman For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Rabindra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 12-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

Supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner which has been taken on record.

The petitioner wants to renew his prayer of bail, which was earlier rejected vide order dated 18.05.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 18654 of 2016 which was disposed of with Cr. Misc. No. 12782 of 2016, on the ground that the petitioner is suffering in custody since 03.01.2016, he is not named in the first information report, there is no sufficient material against the petitioner, the petitioner was not present at the time of occurrence as the petitioner was deputed in State Bank of India at Bettiah Branch as guard and the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is nothing but the example of police atrocities as the petitioner is not named in

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25260 of 2017 (2) dt.12-07-2017 any of the cases and as such he deserves sympathetic consideration.

Learned APP seriously opposes the prayer of bail by submitting that the petitioner was present in the vehicle to assist the shooters and further he is involved in 9 serious cases. In the facts and circumstances stated above, finding no good ground for reconsideration of prayer for bail of the petitioner, again his prayer for bail stands rejected. However, learned trial court is again directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably within four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, failing which, the petitioner, if at no fault, may be at liberty to renew his prayer of bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T