Pintu Chaudhary @ Pintoo Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.23155 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-334 Year-2016 Thana- ARA NAGAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Pintu Chaudhary @ Pintoo Choudhary S/o Ram Chandra Chaudhary, R/o Vill.- Bhaluhipur, P.S.- Arrah Town, District- Bhojpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Md. Ataul Haque For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Harendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 05-09-2018 Heard both sides.

The petitioner seeks bail in Ara Town P.S. Case No.334 of 2016 registered under Sections 302, 328 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected vide order dated 10.04.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No.11687 of 2017 and the trial court was directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within nine months from the date of receipt of the order and if the trial is not concluded, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail. It is further submitted that till date not even a single witness has been examined. A report was called for from the court of the learned 6th Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bhojpur, Ara and it appears from the perusal of the report that

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23155 of 2018(3) dt.05-09-2018 2/3 the learned 6th Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bhojpur, Ara framed the charge against all the three accused persons on 13.07.2017 but till date the trial has not yet been concluded. Petitioner is in jail since 20.07.2016. The petitioner has already remained in jail for about more than two years. It appears that the father of the deceased alleged that daughter was married to the petitioner in the year 2016 but the petitioner within three years of marriage with the deceased is alleged to have killed his wife and hurriedly cremated the dead body. Petitioner is husband and he is in custody for about little more than two years.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. Accordingly the same is rejected.

The trial court is directed to hold the trial on day to day basis and conclude the same within six months from the date of receipt of this order.

The Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur, Ara is directed to ensure the presence of prosecution witnesses of Ara Town P.S. Case No.334 of 2016, corresponding to Sessions Trial No.251 of 2017 so that the trial must be concluded within six months.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23155 of 2018(3) dt.05-09-2018 3/3 Let a copy of this order be sent to the trial court and the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur, Ara for information and needful.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) S.KUMAR/- U T