Patna High CourtCR. MISC./6436/2021dismissed

Mithilesh Yadav @ Mithlesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2021-02-24Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6436 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-70 Year-2019 Thana- CHAUTHAM District- Khagaria ====================================================== MITHILESH YADAV @ MITHLESH YADAV S/O NAND KISHORE YADAV Resident Of Village - Darauli, P. S. - Balia, District - Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Viveka Nandsingh :

Mr.Hira Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jagdhar Prasad (APP) :

Mr.Ashutosh Kumar Verma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-02-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State. This application for grant of regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 219 of 2019 arises out of Chautham P.S. Case No. 70 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 302, 379 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner had earlier approached this Court for grant of regular bail, which was rejected by an order dated 20.11.2019 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 48565 of 2019 with an observation that the petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after one year, if in the meanwhile, there was no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6436 of 2021(3) dt.24-02-2021 2/2 substantial progress at the trial. This is the background, in which, the petitioner has renewed his prayer for release on bail. A report dated 30.01.2021, as called for from the Court below as regards up to date status of the trial arising out of the criminal case has been submitted by learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge-V, Khagaria from which it transpires that examination of witnesses has commenced and two out of nine witnesses have already been examined as on 30.01.2021. In such circumstance, I am not inclined to reconsider the petitioner's case for grant of regular bail. This application is accordingly dismissed.

The Court below should take all possible steps for expeditious conclusion of the trial. If the trial is not concluded within six months from today, the petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) AKASH/- U T