Ravi Shankar Kumar @ Ravi Raj v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.62226 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2015 Thana- Hajipur Sadar District- Vaishali ====================================================== Ravi Shankar Kumar @ Ravi Raj S/o Surendra Singh, R/o Village- Ghoswar, P.S.- Sadar Hajipur, District- Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Surendra Kishore Thakur For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nagendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 5.

07-02-2018 Heard Sri Surendra Kishore Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Nagendra Prasad, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.

This is the 2nd attempt for grant of bail on behalf of the petitioner in Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No. 190 of 2015 registered for offence under Sections 304(B), 498(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Earlier, the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected on 06-12-2016, vide Cr. Misc. No. 42100 of 2016, precisely on the ground that petitioner was the husband of the deceased and death had occurred due to strangulation and that too in the house of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, renewing the prayer for bail, submits that despite the fact that petitioner is in custody

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.62226 of 2017(5) dt.07-02-2018 2/3 since 02-05-2016, no appropriate progress has taken place before the court below.

Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor submits that in this case, earlier a report was called for from the court below regarding stage of the case. He further submits that charge has already been framed.

Besides hearing, I have also examined the report dated 17th of January, 2018 of the learned Sessions Judge, Vaishali, kept at flag 'A'. On going through the same, it is evident that charge has already been framed and thereafter, warrant and D.O. letter have been issued to S.P., Vaishali for production of the witnesses. Meaning thereby that steps are being taken for expeditious disposal of the trial.

Accordingly, since on merit, the prayer for bail has already been rejected, there is no reason for review of my earlier order.

The prayer for bail again stands rejected.

However, while dismissing, it is desirable to direct the court below as well as prosecution to take appropriate steps so that the case may come to its logical end without unnecessary delay.

The concerned Superintendent of Police is directed to

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.62226 of 2017(5) dt.07-02-2018 3/3 ensure production of witnesses as and when required by the Trial Judge.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned Superintendent of Police for its compliance.

(Rakesh Kumar, J.) anay U T