Shyam Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 29116 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2016 Thana- Baruraj District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Shyam Kumar Yadav S/o Satyanarayan Rai resident of Village- Machhahi, P.S. Sakra, District Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar @ S.K.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Madan Kumar =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3.
06-09-2017 Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar @ S.K., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Madan Kumar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.
This is the second attempt for grant of bail on behalf of petitioner in Baruraj P.S. Case No. 14 of 2016 registered for offence under Sections 399, 402, 414 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 25(1-b)a, 26(ii), 35 of the Arms Act, 1959 and Sections 20 & 22 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Earlier, the prayer for bail of petitioner was rejected on 22-12-2016, vide Cr. Misc. No. 48493 of 2016. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though, petitioner is in custody since February, 2016, no adequate progress has taken place in the case. Earlier, by order dated 09-08-2017, a report was
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29116 of 2017(3) dt.06-09-2017 2/2 called for from the court below regarding stage of the case, which has been received and kept at flag 'X'. The report dated 22-08-2017 suggests that out of 10 charge-sheeted witnesses, five witnesses have already been examined and the case is fixed for evidence.
Considering the fact that trial is going on, there is no reason to review my earlier order. The prayer for bail again stands rejected.
However, while dismissing, it is desirable to observe that learned Trial Judge may take appropriate step so that the case may come to its logical end without unnecessary delay. It is also necessary to direct the concerned Superintendent of Police to produce witnesses, as and when, required by the trial court.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned Superintendent of Police forthwith.
(Rakesh Kumar, J.) anay U T