Deepak Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58069 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-468 Year-2019 Thana- GARKHA District- Saran ====================================================== DEEPAK RAI, S/o- Anil Rai R/o Village- Doriganj, P.S.- Doriganj, districtSaran at Chapra. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ram Chandra Singh, Advocate Ms. Dimpal Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Damodar Prasad Tiwary, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 17-11-2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove all the defects as pointed out by office within four weeks after start of normal functioning of the Court.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary, learned A.P.P. for the State.

This is the second attempt of the petitioner in seeking regular bail in connection with Garkha P.S. Case No. 468 of 2019 registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 08.12.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 27962 of 2020 by this Court. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 21.09.2019 but the trial is not progressing well.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58069 of 2021(2) dt.17-11-2021 2/2 Mr.Damodar Prasad Tiwary, learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is accused in thirteen criminal cases. Having regard to the reasoning provided in the order dated 08.12.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 27962 of 2020 saying that the recovery of looted motorcycle has been made from the house of the petitioner and there is huge criminal antecedents of the petitioner, this Court has found no reason to take a different view of the case at this stage. Therefore, the second attempt for bail would, thus, fail.

Let the trial be expedited.

The learned trial court is expected to take up the matter expeditiously and all endeavours be made to conclude the trial preferably within a period of one year from the date of communication of this order. If the trial remains unconcluded for no reason attributable to the petitioner, he may renew his prayer for bail. This application stands disposed of accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) vats/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.