Patna High CourtCR. MISC./21579/2015rejected

Manoj Kumar @ Manoj Kumar Verma v. The State Of Bihar

2015-07-22Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.21579 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -249 Year- 2012 Thana -JAKKANPUR District- PATNA ====================================================== Manoj Kumar @ Manoj Kumar Verma son of Raghunath Saran Verma Resident of Loko Colony Railway quarter no. 59 AB, Mithapur, P.S.- Jakkanpur, District- Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The state of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 22-07-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is accused in connection with Sessions Trial No. 230 of 2013 arising out of Jakkanpur P.S. Case No. 249 of 2012 registered under section 302/34 of the I.P.C. pending in the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge-Xth, Patna. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that earlier prayer of the petitioner for bail was rejected by the Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 35185 of 2013 dated 11.04.2014. It is also submitted that petitioner, having no criminal antecedent, is in custody since 15.09.2012.

Admittedly, prayer of the petitioner was earlier rejected on merit by this Court. The report, as received through

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21579 of 2015 (3) dt.22-07-2015 2/2 Letter No. 116 dated 06.07.2015 from the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge-XI, Patna, shows that after framing of charge, out of 11 charge-sheet witnesses, six has been examined and steps are being taken for evidence of rest of the charge-sheeted witnesses. It is expected that for concluding of the trial at least six months time will be consumed.

In such circumstances, I am not inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioner for bail. Accordingly, this application is rejected. However, trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

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