Pappu Prasad @ Pappu Kumar Prasad v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.13212 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2015 Thana- EKMA District- Saran ====================================================== Pappu Prasad @ Pappu Kumar Prasad, S/o Late Ganga Sagar Prasad, R/o Village Gajiyapur, P.S. Ekma, District- Saran, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Avanish Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Anant Kumar (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 07-03-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel representing the State.
The petitioner wants to renew the prayer of bail which was earlier rejected vide order dated 11.02.2016 passed in Cri. Misc. No. 56282 of 2015, on the ground that the petitioner is suffering in custody since 08.07.2015 after his surrender, during trial only four prosecution witnesses have been examined and in near future the trial is not likely to be concluded. Other co-accused are on bail and, as such, the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration.
The learned A.P.P. seriously opposes the prayer of bail by submitting that the petitioner is the assailant. In the facts and circumstances stated above,
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.13212 of 2018(2) dt.07-03-2018 2/2 finding no good ground for reconsideration of prayer of the bail, again prayer of the bail of the petitioner stands rejected in connection with Ekma P.S. Case No. 113 of 2015, Sessions Trial No. 582 of 2015 pending in the court of learned 6th Additional District & Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra.
However, considering the detention of the petitioner, the learned trail Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within nine months, from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order after taking the same on priority basis, failing which the petitioner, if at no fault, may be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.
(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Rajiv/- U T