The High Court rejected the petitioner's bail application, denying release as he is the husband of the deceased. Despite the trial court's delayed progress report, the Court directed a specific timeline for concluding the trial.
Prayer for bail rejected; trial court directed to conclude trial within five months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28439 of 2013 (3) dt.11-09-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.28439 of 2013
====================================================== 1. Rajiv Ranjan Jha S/O Shibendra Jha .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 3 11-09-2013 Supplementary affidavit is filed on behalf of the
petitioner.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 13.08.2012 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 22279 of 2012 with direction to learned trial court to conclude the trial of the petitioner within nine months from the date of receipt of this order.
The learned trial court has reported that up till now six prosecution witnesses including the informant have already been examined and the evidence of Investigating Officer as well as doctor is required to be taken. It has further been reported that as soon as Investigating Officer and doctor are examined, the trial court will conclude the hearing of both the parties after one week.
The learned trial court has given a vague report and it
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28439 of 2013 (3) dt.11-09-2013
has not been reported by the trial court as to when the order dated 13.08.2012 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 22279 of 2012 was received in his court and apart from this, the learned trial court has not given specific time for conclusion of trial of the petitioner rather the report of trial court reflects that the trial court is totally dependant upon the whims and wishes of prosecution.
Since the petitioner is husband of the deceased and trial of the petitioner is going on, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail and accordingly, his prayer for bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 398 of 2012 arising out of Bihpur (Bhawanipur) P.S. Case No. 08 of 2012 pending in the court of 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Naugachia, Bhagalpur is again rejected.
However, learned trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner within five months from the date of receipt of this order.
Let this order be communicated to the court of 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Naugachia, Bhagalpur in connection with above stated case through fax forthwith.
(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J)
SHAHZAD/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner be released on bail given the pending trial and vague report from the trial court regarding trial conclusion timelines.
Whether the trial court will conclude the trial within the stipulated time frame.
Whether the order dated 13.08.2012 directing trial conclusion within nine months should be reconsidered.
Rajiv Ranjan Jha
The State Of Bihar
Hemant Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
