Patna High CourtCR. MISC./11890/2017rejected

Manoj Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

2017-03-15Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11890 of 2017 (2) dt.15-03-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.11890 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -51 Year- 2015 Thana -LAKHNAUR District- MADHUBANI ====================================================== Manoj Chaudhary S/o Late Vijay Chaudhary Resident of Village - Vishan Patti, P.S. - Lakhnaur, Distt - Madhubani.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar No 13 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Matloob Rab, APP-34 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 15-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner wants to renew his prayer of bail, which was earlier rejected vide order dated 16.05.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 12473 of 2016, on the ground that the petitioner is suffering in custody since 31.08.2015 having no criminal antecedent, medical evidence does not support the prosecution version and age of the victim has been found 17 years, the case has been lodged after inordinate delay and as such the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration.

Learned APP opposes the prayer of bail by submitting that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has supported the allegation of rape by the petitioner and co-accused Jai Ram Chaudhary and the delay in lodging the FIR has been fully explained.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11890 of 2017 (2) dt.15-03-2017 In the facts and circumstances stated above, finding no good ground for reconsideration of prayer for bail of the petitioner, again his prayer for bail stands rejected. However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably within four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, failing which the petitioner, if at no fault, may be at liberty to renew his prayer of bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T