Rakesh Yadav vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 4298 Patna

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                   CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 16857 of 2021
            Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2019 Thana- SARMERA District- Nalanda
      ======================================================

1. Rakesh Yadav, Male, aged about 31 years, Son of Ram Yadav.

2. Rajo Yadav, Male, aged about 51 years, Son of Late Jagu Yadav.

Both resident of Village- Sondiha, PS- Sarmera, District- Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

      For the Petitioner/s    :        Mr. Raj Kishor Prasad, Advocate
      For the State           :        Mr. Kalyan Shankar, APP

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 25-08-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Raj Kishor Prasad, learned counsel for

the petitioners and Mr. Kalyan Shankar, learned Additional

Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the

State.

3. The petitioners are in custody in connection with

Sarmera PS Case No. 14 of 2019 dated 28.01.2019, instituted

under Sections 364 of the Indian Penal Code to which, later on,

Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code was added.

4. This is the second attempt for bail by the petitioners

as earlier such prayer was rejected by judgment and order dated

08.07.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 74845 of 2019. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16857 of 2021 dt.25-08-2021

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that on

merits, the Court had earlier rejected the prayed for bail at

that time. It was submitted that the petitioner no. 1 is in custody

since 12.07.2019 and petitioner no. 2 since 17.06.2019. It was

further submitted that the Court may call for a report from the

Court below with regard to the status of the case.

6. On the aforesaid stand of learned counsel for the

petitioners on 04.08.2021, the Court had called for a report from

the Court below with regard to the status of the trial and

the likely time by which it can be concluded.

7. Pursuant to the same, a report has been submitted by

the Additional District and Sessions Judge, 3 rd, Nalanda at

Biharsharif dated 11.08.2021, in which it has been stated that out

of six witnesses cited in the chargesheet, three, including the

informant, have been examined and three witnesses are remaining

including the Investigating Officer and Doctor to whom, summons

have been issued on 07.08.2021. It has further been stated that due

to the present prevailing circumstances, at least four months' time

be given to conclude the trial.

8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

case and taking note of what has been stated in the order dated

08.07.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 74845 of 2019, by which Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16857 of 2021 dt.25-08-2021

earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioners was rejected, the Court

does not find any mitigating circumstances to reconsider the same.

9. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.

10. However, the Court below is directed to ensure the

trial is completed within six months in view of the fact that the

report itself states that it can be completed within four months.

Thus, the Court has granted an additional period of two months

for such completion.

11. Registry shall communicate the order to the Court

below latest by tomorrow.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

P. Kumar

AFR/NAFR U T