Shyam Sundar Vishwakarma v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79366 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2022 Thana- PAUTHU District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Shyam Sundar Vishwakarma Son of Late Khaderan Vishwakarma VillageBeri, Ps- Pauthu, Dist- Aurangabad ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Ms. Soni Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Pawan Kumar Chaurasia ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 25-04-2025 Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State are present.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's earlier prayer for bail was rejected vide order dated 22.02.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 10908 of 2024, with a direction to the learned Trial Court to conclude the trial at the earliest, preferably within one year. The Court had further granted liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail if the trial was not concluded within one year from the said date.
3. Learned counsel further submits that the present case pertains to the Arms Act and that the petitioner is in custody since 12.08.2022.
4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the present bail application has been filed in gross violation of the earlier order dated 22.02.2024,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79366 of 2024(5) dt.25-04-2025 2/2 which granted liberty to file for bail only after one year i.e., after 22.02.2025. However, the present bail application has been filed prematurely on 30.10.2024.
5. It is further submitted by learned APP for the State that the case is not limited to possession of arms alone, but involves 39 different articles typically used in running an illegal gun factory.
6. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner in connection with Sessions Trial No. 434 of 2022 / 451 of 2022, arising out of Pauthu P.S. Case No. 86 of 2022, pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-15th, Civil Court, Aurangabad, is hereby rejected.
7. However, this Court is conscious of the fact that speedy trial is the constitutional vision of justice. Therefore, the Superintendent of Police, Aurangabad, is directed to monitor the progress of the case and ensure that the Investigating Officer / Station House Officer concerned takes effective steps to produce the witnesses before the Trial Court within six months, so that the trial may be concluded expeditiously.
(Dr. Anshuman, J) Ashwini/- U T