Rajesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.904 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2020 Thana- CHANDAN District- Banka ====================================================== Rajesh Yadav, Son of Khiro Yadav, Resident of Village-Kumharadih, P.SChandan (Anandpur), Distt- Banka ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Md. Nurul Hoda, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Smt. Meena Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 13-04-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S.T. No.124 of 2020 arising out of Chandan (Anandpur) P.S. Case No.58 of 2020 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, which is pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Banka.

Prayer for bail was earlier rejected on 21.06.2021 in Cr.Misc. No.1313 of 2021. The prayer has been renewed. The petitioner is alleged to have assaulted the informant's husband after calling him from his house. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no substantial progress at the trial, for nearly two years the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.904 of 2022(5) dt.13-04-2022 2/2 petitioner has remained in custody and there is no allegation that any fatal arm was used by the petitioner in the alleged assault. The learned APP has gone through the case diary and made submissions referring to the post-mortem report, which corroborates the accusation against the petitioner of brutal assault. The post-mortem report records several ante-mortem injuries by hard and blunt substance.

Having regard to the nature of allegations and materials collected during the investigation, this Court, for the present, is not inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioner for grant of bail. The same is rejected.

This Court, however, would observe that the trial court should proceed with the matter expeditiously without unnecessary delay or undue adjournments.

This Court would expect that the petitioner's counsel would honour his undertaking in the instant proceedings regarding supply of the requisite court fee etc. within two weeks from the date he is called upon to do so by the office. (Madhuresh Prasad, J) PNM U T