Ved Prakash v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.7277 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -594 Year- 2015 Thana -BETTIAH CITY District- WEST CHAMPARAN (BETTIAH) ====================================================== Ved Prakash, son of Veer Chandra Singh, Resident of Village- Asapur Mairava, P.S.- Goraul, District- Vaishali.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anish Chandra, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Khare, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 18-05-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks bail in Bettiah P.S. Case No. 594 of 2015 instituted for the offence under Sections 302, 201 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

It has been submitted that bail petition of one of the coaccused has already been rejected by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.6.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. 13915 of 2016.

Petitioner is named in the written report.

The Sessions Judge has mentioned in the impugned order that Video clip of the occurrence was prepared in mobile phone and that Mobile phone was seized by the police which is mentioned in paragraphs 143 and 144 of the case diary. Co-

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7277 of 2017 (4) dt.18-05-2017 2/2 accused Ashish Kumar Srivastava in his confessional statement has taken the name of this petitioner during investigation. It has been submitted on behalf of the learned counsel for the informant that charge has already been framed. In such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

Prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected. The court below is directed to expedite the trial by fixing the case on day-to-day basis together with trial of another co-accused Ashish Kumar Srivastava in terms of the order dated 14.12.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. 44383 of 2016. The petitioner is given liberty to renew his prayer for bail after six months in the court below itself if no substantive progress is made in the trial. The trial court will give the reason for not concluding the trial within aforesaid period. (Sanjay Priya, J) S.Ali/- U T