Rambhu Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.2000 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -29 Year- 2005 Thana -MUFFASIL District- WEST CHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ======================================================

1. Rambhu Ram Son of Late Shankar Ram Resident of Village : Prakash Nagar (Naya Tola), P.S.: Shikarpur, District : West Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Adya Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar Rai (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 21-01-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner is in jail custody since 07.05.2005 in connection with Bettiah Muffasil P.S. Case No. 29 of 2005 registered for the offence punishable under Section 364A/34 of the Indian Penal Code on the accusation that he and other accused kidnapped the informant's brother and took ransom amount. Earlier the prayer for bail of this petitioner was rejected by this court vide order dated 03.01.2012 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 14581 of 2011 directing the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bettiah, West Champaran to conclude the trial of the petitioner within six months but up till now, the trial of the

petitioner could not be concluded.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner drew my attention towards impugned order dated 03.12.2014 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, West Champaran, Bettiah and submitted that out of 18 proposed prosecution witnesses, only seven prosecution witnesses could be examined till 03.12.2014. It is submitted by him that when the prayer for bail of this petitioner was rejected by this court vide order dated 03.01.2012 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 14581 of 2011, the position was same and in spite of passing of two years, the trial of the petitioner could not be concluded. It is further contended by him that so far as criminal antecedent of the petitioner is concerned, petitioner was remanded in almost all the cases after institution of the present case.

Considering the period of detention of the petitioner in jail custody as well as submissions of the parties, let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Bettiah Muffasil P.S. Case No. 29 of 2005 corresponding to Sessions Trial No.

trial whichever is earlier and if he fails to do so on two consecutive dates without any genuine cause, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner. (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) SHAHZAD/- U T