Dharambir Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.55789 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -533 Year- 2010 Thana -LAKHISARAI District- LAKHISARAI ======================================================

1. Dharambir Singh Son of Aditya Singh resident of village - Sharma, P.S. + District - Lakhisarai .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rabi Bhushan Prasad No. 1 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Rabindra Kr.(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 02-03-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The petitioner is in custody since 01.02.2014 in connection with Lakhisarai P.S. Case No. 533 of 2010 registered for offences punishable under Sections 304B, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prayer for regular bail had been earlier rejected by this Court with the liberty that in case the Trial is not concluded within the prescribed period, the petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

A report was called for, from the Court below on the prayer of renewal of bail by the petitioner and the Court below has

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55789 of 2015 (4) dt.02-03-2016 2/3 reported that the trial is well in progress and is likely to take further period of nine months.

The diary in the present case was also called for pursuant to the report.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that there is a history of torture of the deceased by the petitioner and earlier case under Section 498A and 307 had been registered against the petitioner. Earlier, this Court while rejecting the prayer of bail, had gone into the details of the allegations made against the present petitioner and at present no new grounds have been made out for reconsideration of prayer of bail. Considering the fact that the petitioner is the husband and the nature of allegation are such, which does not warrant any relief to the petitioner and also the fact that no new grounds have been made out in the present application for reconsideration of his prayer for regular bail, save and except that this Court had earlier given a liberty to the petitioner for reconsideration of his prayer of bail. I am not inclined to extend the benefit of regular bail to the petitioner. It is accordingly rejected.

However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within a period as stated in the report and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55789 of 2015 (4) dt.02-03-2016 3/3 ensure that no adjournments are granted to any of the parties so that the trial may reach to its logical conclusion within aforementioned period.

(Anjana Mishra, J) sunil/- U T