Arun Kumar @ Arun Chandravanshi vs State Of Jharkhand

The present bail application is taken up through video conferencing.

At the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects, as pointed out by the office, are ignored.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner is an accused for the offences punishable under Sections 341/323/354/337/338/307/302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the

Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act, in connection with Sessions Trial No. 225 of 2017, pending in the court of the Additional Sessions Judge-

V, Palamau.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's bail applications were earlier rejected by this Court twice. By way of present bail

application, the petitioner has renewed his prayer for regular bail primarily for the reason that he is in judicial custody since 16.11.2016 and the trial has

not yet been concluded. At least considering the length of judicial custody, the petitioner may be given the privilege of regular bail.

Learned A.P.P. while opposing the petitioner's prayer for bail submits that out of nine charge-sheet witnesses, eight witnesses have already been

examined by the prosecution. The trials of the criminal cases have been adversely affected due to the restricted functioning of the Trial Courts in the

wake of coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic. It is further submitted that the bail applications of the petitioner have earlier been rejected by this Court on

merit and hence, the petitioner may not be given the privilege of regular bail.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his bail application is rejected.

However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case as soon as the situation prevailing due to coronavirus (Covid-19)

pandemic normalizes and to dispose of the same without any undue delay.