Krishna Kumar @ Banti @ Banti Yadav @ Bambam Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63848 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2018 Thana- SUPAUL District- Supaul ====================================================== Krishna Kumar @ Banti @ Banti Yadav @ Bambam Yadav Son of Barundev Yadav @ Barun Yadav Resident of Village - Bhapatiya, P.S.- Saur Bazar, Dist.- Saharsa.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vijay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Md. Matloob Rab ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-03-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 187 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

The application for grant of bail to the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 20.05.2019 with observation that if the trial of the case would not be concluded within six months from the date of framing of charge, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that despite lapse of over six months time from the date of framing of charge, the trial of the petitioner has not been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63848 of 2019(6) dt.04-03-2020 2/2 concluded.

A report regarding progress of the trial was called for from the court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Supaul vide order dated 22.01.2020.

In compliance with the order dated 22.01.2020, a report dated 31.01.2020 has been submitted by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Supaul.

Having perused the report, I find that the petitioner is involved in more than half a dozen case of identical nature. His criminal activity is spread over four districts, namely, Supaul, Madhepura, Saharsa and Birpur.

In that view of the matter, I see no reason to take a different view of the matter. The application for grant of bail to the petitioner is rejected once again.

The learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Supaul is directed to expedite his trial and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably within six months, from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order, failing which the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) rohit/- U T