This criminal miscellaneous petition for regular bail was rejected by the Patna High Court as no fresh grounds were made out. However, the trial court was directed to conclude the trial within six months.
The trial court is directed to conclude the trial within six months; petitioner allowed to renew bail prayer thereafter.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9925 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2020 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Saharsa
======================================================
Dilip Yadav Son of Mahendra Prasad Yadav @ Mahendra Yadav R/vSiradaypatti PS.- Saharsa Dist- Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Chandra Mohan Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER
4 08-09-2023
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
The instant application for regular bail has been filed by the petitioner, which was earlier rejected vide order dated 08.10.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 16142 of 2021 in connection with Mahila P.S. case No. 19 of 2020 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 376AB, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 4 of POCSO Act and Sections 3(i)(wii) of SC/ST Act.
In compliance of the order dated 28.06.2023, a status report has been received by which it appears that the case is fixed for evidence of prosecution and only three witnesses have been examined out of eight charge-sheet witnesses. It is also mentioned in the report that the P.O. of the concerned court has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9925 of 2023(4) dt.08-09-2023 2/2
been transferred and the court is vacant.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 05.09.2020 and the court is functional but still the trial has not been concluded within the stipulated time frame mentioned in the earlier order 08.10.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 16142 of 2021.
No fresh ground is made out for reconsideration of the regular bail application of the petitioner. Accordingly, this application is rejected.
The learned trial court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of six months failing which, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)
lata/- U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the regular bail application of the petitioner should be reconsidered in light of the delay in trial.
Whether the language that the trial court is functional justifies concluding the trial within the stipulated time frame.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
DILIP YADAV
THE STATE OF BIHAR
SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
