Patna High CourtCR. MISC./69102/2021disposed

Ranjeet Singh @ Baudha v. The State Of Bihar

2022-02-16Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69102 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2020 Thana- LAKHISARAI District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== RANJEET SINGH @ BAUDHA Son of Ramdas Singh Resident of Village - Walipur, P.S.- Piparia, District - Lakhisarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Amitesh Kumar, APP Mr. Subhesh Pandey, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 16-02-2022 Heard Mr. Bipin Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Subhesh Pandey for the informant. The State is represented by Mr. Amitesh Kumar, learned APP for the State.

The prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected vide order dated 26.05.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 36491 of 2020.

While rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioner, this Court had observed that if there is no substantial progress in the trial within next six months, it would be open for the petitioner to approach the trial court and in that event the court below shall be under an obligation to record the reasons for the tardy progress of the trial.

The petitioner does not appear to have moved

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69102 of 2021(3) dt.16-02-2022 2/2 the trial court.

However, this Court had called for a report from the court below about the stage of the case. The report indicates that the case has not even been committed to the Courts of Sessions.

This Court is not happy at this pace of trial, considering the period of custody of the petitioner. Let the petitioner approach the trial court for grant of bail during the pendency of the trial and the trial court shall indicate reasons for its order either rejecting the prayer for bail or allowing the same. Needless to state that this Court expects that the commitment proceeding should be completed without any delay, preferably within a period of two months. If the petitioner is not satisfied with the order passed by the trial court, he shall have the liberty to approach this Court again.

This petition stands disposed off with the aforesaid observation.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) krishna/- U T