IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.42988 of 2010
USHA DEVI, W/O BISHUNDEO MAHTO, R/O
VILLAGE: CHANAUN, P.S. RUPAOU, DISTRICT
NAWADA.
.................................PETITIONER.
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR.
.................................OPPOSITE PARTY.
-----------
03/ 20.04.2011 Having heard Mr. Shakil Ahmad
Khan, learned senior counsel for the
petitioner and counsel for the State
and taking into account that the
trial of the petitioner could not be
concluded, only because of the co-
accused brought into the ambit of
trial under Section 319 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure were not
appearing before the Court on
account of pendency of their
anticipatory bail application before
this Court and that they have been
ultimately granted such anticipatory
bail, this Court would reject the
prayer for bail of the petitioner by
directing the trial Court to ensure
that the trial of the petitioner and
other co-accused persons should be
completed within a period of six
months from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this
order.
The trial Court must keep in
mind that the other co-accused
persons are under an obligation to
remain present in course of trial
and have to suffer the consequences
for not remaining present for not
doing so. Thus the petitioner should
not be made to suffer in the
completion of the trial on account
of any evasive tactics of other co
accused persons enlarged on bail.
It however goes without saying that if the trial of the
petitioner is not completed within a
period of aforesaid six months it
will be open for the petitioner to
move this Court for renewing her
prayer for bail in this case.
With the aforesaid
observations and directions, the
prayer for bail of the petitioner is
rejected.
Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha,J)