Patna High CourtCR. MISC./25515/2015rejected

Pashuram Bind @ Prashuram Bind v. The State Of Bihar

2015-08-05Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25515 of 2015 (3) dt.05-08-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.25515 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -28 Year- 2013 Thana -VIJAYPUR District- GOPALGANJ ====================================================== PASHURAM BIND @ PRASHURAM BIND, SON OF HARI BIND, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- CHORE TOTA DEUKHA, P.S.- GOPALPUR, DISTT.- GOPALGANJ.

.... .... PETITIONER/S

VERSUS

THE STATE OF BIHAR .... .... OPPOSITE PARTY/S ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anirudh Kumar Verma, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dashrath Mehta (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 05-08-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner is accused in connection with Trial No. 42 of 2013 arising out of Bijaipur P.S. Case No. 28 of 2013 registered under Sections 8, 20 and 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act pending in the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gopalganj.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected vide order dated 25.02.2014 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 28920 of 2013 by this Court. It is further submitted that petitioner is in custody since 01.03.2013 and has no criminal antecedent.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25515 of 2015 (3) dt.05-08-2015 A report regarding the present stage of trial has been received through letter no. 215 dated 28.07.2015, from the court of Additional Sessions Judge-I, Gopalganj, which disclosed that charge has been framed on 30.04.2014 and out of nine charge sheeted witnesses, six witnesses have been examined up till now and rest three witnesses are to be examined and also the trial is likely to be concluded within a period of six months. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the quantity of seized Ganja, I find no ground to reconsider the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. However, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner within six months by taking all effective steps.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T