Patna High CourtCR. MISC./82912/2023dismissed

Akhilesh Yadav @ Akhilesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-07-19Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82912 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-282 Year-2021 Thana- NAWADA MUFFASIL District- Nawada ====================================================== AKHILESH YADAV @ AKHILESH KUMAR S/O BINESAR YADAV @ DINENDESHWAR YADAV @ DINESH YADAV R/O VILLAGE- TRILOKI BIGHA, P.S.- MUFFASIL, DISTRICT- NAWADA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Raj Kishor Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Suman Kumari Singh For the Informant :

Mr.Raja Ram Mishra Mr.Raj Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 19-07-2024 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned APP for the State.

2. The earlier regular bail petition of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 05.04.2023 in Cr. Misc. No. 53877 of 2022. While rejecting the bail application, this Court observed that it is expected that the trial could be concluded within a period of six months.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial has not been concluded up-till now.

4. A report was called for from the learned court below along with the xerox copy of the entire order sheets as well as deposition of the witnesses examined, which is available

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82912 of 2023(3) dt.19-07-2024 2/2 on the record.

5. From perusal of the report, it appears that five witnesses including the Doctor, who conducted the autopsy on the dead body of the deceased, have been examined. They all have supported the prosecution case.

6. It appears that the trial is on the verge of its conclusion.

7. I do not find any reason to reconsider the earlier order dated 05.04.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 53877 of 2022. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

8. However, if the trial is not concluded within a period of six months, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) kundan/- U T