Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1400/2024rejected

Pankaj Yadav @ Pankaj Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2024-02-09Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1400 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-226 Year-2020 Thana- SINGHWARA District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Pankaj Yadav @ Pankaj Kumar Yadav Son of Parikshan Yadav Village Bhagwatipur PS Singhwara District Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mrs.Manisha Prakash, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Arvind Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-02-2024 Heard Mrs.Manisha Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Arvind Kumar Pandey, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 18.04.2022 in connection with S.Tr.No.475 of 2022 arising out of Singhwara P.S. Case No. 226 of 2020, F.I.R. dated 20.12.2020 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302,120(b) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 01.05.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No.40636 of 2022. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed the present bail petition for renewing his prayer.

4. Vide order dated 12.01.2024 a report was called for with regard to the present status of the trial. Report dated

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1400 of 2024(3) dt.09-02-2024 2/2 22.01.2024 of the learned Trial Court reveals that out of six chargesheet witnesses, four witnesses have already been examined and the case is pending for the examination of rest of two prosecution witnesses.

5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, report of the learned Trial Court and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with S.Tr.No.475 of 2022 arising out of Singhwara P.S. Case No. 226 of 2020 pending in the court of learned A.D.J.-XI, Darbhanga.

7. Prayer is refused.

8. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T