Rambabu Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.58356 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-55 Year-2013 Thana- ANDHRAMATH District- Madhubani ====================================================== Rambabu Sah son of Dashrath Sah resident of village - Hariraha, P.S. Andharamath, District - Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amar Nath Yadav For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nityanand ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 02-01-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Andhramath P.S. Case No. 55 of 2013, registered under Section 302 of Indian Penal, pending in the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge-VI, Madhubani.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, admittedly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner was refused thrice lastly on 14.03.2018 with direction to trial Court to conclude the trial of the petitioner by taking all effective steps for appearance of the prosecution witnesses, but in spite of passing of nine months the trial of the petitioner has not been concluded as yet. The petitioner is in custody since 19.07.2014.

The report, as called for, has been received from the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge-VI, Madhubani, which indicates that

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.58356 of 2018(3) dt.02-01-2019 2/2 out of 7 Chargesheet witnesses, six witnesses have already been examined and he expected that the trial would be completed within seven month.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner for bail is again rejected. However, the Addl. Sessions Judge-VI, Madhubani, is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner within eight months by taking all effective steps, if the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within the aforesaid period, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T