Rakesh Yadav @ Rakesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6790 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-151 Year-2018 Thana- PARASBIGHA District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Rakesh Yadav @ Rakesh Kumar, S/o Late Ramanand Yadav, Resident of Village - Malichak, P.S. - Paras Bigha, District - Jehanabad. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Umesh Kumar, Advocate, For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dinesh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 07-04-2021 As prayed for, let the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within four weeks of starting of the Court proceeding in physical mode in normal course.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner is accused in connection with Sessions Trial No. 188 of 2019, arising out of Paras Bigha P.S. Case No. 151 of 2018, registered under Section 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Jehanabad. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is the husband of the deceased and he is in custody since 04.09.2018 but the trial of the petitioner has not been concluded as yet. Further submission is that the prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6790 of 2021(3) dt.07-04-2021 2/2 rejected on merit vide order dated 24.01.2010 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 2344 of 2020 by this Court.

A report regarding the present stage of trial has been received through letter no. 128 dated 27.02.2021, from the court of 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Jehanabad, which shows that out of nine charge sheet witnesses, only three witnesses have been examined and six witnesses are yet to be examined and also expected that the trial of the petitioner is likely to be concluded within six months.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of bail stands rejected. However, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner within six months from today by taking all effective steps. If the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within the aforesaid period of six months, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T