Jagga Thakur @ Jagdish Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

(FROM RESIDENTIAL OFFICE VIA VIDEO APPLICATION) CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10469 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2001 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== JAGGA THAKUR @ JAGDISH THAKUR S/o Sineshwar Thakur Resident of Village - Kuari Chauk, P.S. - Ganga Bridge, District - Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Akhileshwar Dayal,APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 20-05-2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within four weeks after start of normal functioning of the Court. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal, learned APP for the State. The petitioner in the present case is seeking regular bail in Sessions Trial No. 441 of 2003 arising out of Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No. 95 of 2001 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 224, 225, 307, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was earlier granted bail but due to his absence before the learned trial court his bail was cancelled on 02.07.2008 and he has been declared obsconder on 07.02.2018.

Learned counsel submits that the absence of the petitioner was not intentional and the petitioner is in custody since 13.09.2020.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10469 of 2021(2) dt.20-05-2021 2/2 Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, wherein it appears that the bail bond of the petitioner was cancelled in the year 2008, after 10 years he was declared absconder and then finally he was arrested on 13.09.2020, he has delayed the conclusion of the trial court over a decade, this Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. The prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is, thus, refused.

Let the trial be expedited. The trial court is expected to proceed with the trial of the petitioner as soon as after the normalcy restored in the trial court's functioning and all endeavours be made to conclude the trial preferably within a period of nine months. The application stands disposed of accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) SUSHMA2/- 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'.