Ashish Kumar Srivastava @ Ashish @ Guddu v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44383 of 2016 (4) dt.14-12-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.44383 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -594 Year- 2015 Thana -BETTIAH TOWN DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ====================================================== Ashish Kumar Srivastava @ Ashish @ Guddu Son of Late Shambhoo Prasad Srivastava Ex. Resident of Village- Madhopur, Police StationMajhaulia, District- West Champaran. Presently Residing at Mohalla New Colony, Dakbangla Road, Bettiah, Police Station- Bettiah Town DistrictWest Champaran. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate Mr. Sanjay Kumar No.-7 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Umanath Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 14-12-2016 Heard learned Sr. 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 22.06.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 13915 of 2016, on the ground that the petitioner is in custody since 04.11.2015. The petitioner has not given wrong address either before the Police or in his bail petition before the learned court below and also not before this Court rather he has given correct address. From the report of the learned trial court it appears that up-till now only charges have been framed on 12.07.2016 and there are altogether 22 chargesheet witnesses and as such nine months time has been sought for concluding the trial. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and in near future

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44383 of 2016 (4) dt.14-12-2016 the trial is not likely to be concluded. There is no chance of tampering with prosecution evidence.

Learned APP duly assisted by learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer of bail by submitting that the petitioner prepared video clips from mobile regarding killing of the deceased and demanded ransom from Abhay Kumar Soni, the owner of S. K. Jewelers.

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 in connection with Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 594 of 2015.

However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably within six months after taking the same on priority basis and if possible on day to day basis, failing which, the petitioner, if at no fault, may be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

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