Dismissed

Golu Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC26 Aug 2015CR. MISC./34569/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected a bail application in a rape case, noting the trial court delayed framing charges beyond a prior six-month order. The Court ordered day-to-day trial conclusion within six months from receipt of the judgment, allowing bail renewal thereafter if delay persists.

What did the court decide?

Bail rejected; trial ordered day-to-day basis with six-month completion target from order receipt.

Golu Ansari Vs The State Of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.34569 of 2015

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -76 Year- 2013 Thana -SIKARPUR DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ====================================================== 1. Golu Ansari Son of Salim Ansari Resident of Village - Nautanwa, P.S. Shikarpur, District - West Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ganesh Pd.Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 3 26-08-2015 Heard both sides. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under sections 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶3

The prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected vide order dated 15.01.2015 passed in Criminal Misc. No. 34521 of 2014 with a direction to renew his prayer for bail after six months if the trial of the petitioner is not concluded by then. The petitioner is alleged to have committed rape with the victim.

¶4

The learned trial court has reported that the charges have been framed on 22.07.2015 and the trial is likely to be concluded within six months. It appears that the learned trial

¶5

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34569 of 2015 (3) dt.26-08-2015

¶6

¶7

Judge has not made any reference in regard to the receipt of the aforesaid order dated 15.01.2015 by which the learned trial court was directed to conclude the trial within six months. It appears that the charges have been framed only after lapse of six months.

¶8

Considering the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Shikarpur P.S. Case No. 76 of 2013 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 274 of 2015 pending in the court of the learned 5^th Additional Sessions Judge, West Champaran at Bettiah. This application for bail is, accordingly, rejected.

¶9

The trial court is directed to hold the trial of the petitioner on day to day basis and conclude the same within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. If the trial is not concluded within the time aforesaid, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail firstly in the trial court.

¶10

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)

¶11

Amin/-

¶12

Golu Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Golu Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Mokim @ Mayuniddin @ Mainuddin Vs The State Of Bihar

Jashodhar Mahto Vs The State Of Bihar

Surendra Sah Vs The State Of Bihar

Md. Javed @ P.k. Vs The State Of Bihar

Neeraj Kumar Singh and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Sanjay Sada Vs The State Of Bihar