The High Court refused bail to the petitioner in a second attempt, referencing previous considerations regarding lack of trial progress. The court directed the trial court to conclude proceedings promptly and examine the victim at the earliest.
Bail refused. Trial court directed to conclude trial within reasonable time and examine victim at earliest.
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.15504 of 2014 (4) dt.18-06-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.15504 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -42 Year- 2012 Thana -AGAMKUAN District- PATNA
====================================================== Kedar Mahto, son of Om Prakash Mahto .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKHILESH CHANDRA ORAL ORDER 4 18-06-2014 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. This is second attempt on behalf of the petitioner. Perused the report of the trial court indicating commencement of trial but without any positive progress. Having regard to the facts and circumstances stated in brief in previous order dated 30th September 2013 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 36481/2013, there appears no reason to change the stand already taken, hence, prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby refused. Trial court is directed to do all the needfuls to conclude the trial within reasonable period and also ensure examination of the victim at the earliest. The petitioner, if so wishes, may renew the prayer before the trial court itself after examination of the victim. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge - VI, Patnacity, Patna, in connection with Agamkuan P.S. Case No. 42/2012 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 1236/2012 , through Fax at the cost of petitioner.
(Akhilesh Chandra, J)
Rajeev/U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail considering the lack of trial progress and the need for protection of witness.
Whether the trial court has been directed to conclude the trial within a reasonable period.
Kedar Mahto
The State of Bihar
Akhilesh Chandra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
