The Supreme Court on Monday (July 22) was “surprised” at an order of the Patna High Court directing the trial court in a criminal case to complete trial within a year, without considering the huge pendency of cases in trial courts.- Patna High Court
“On 28th February, 2024 while rejecting the bail application, the High Court directed that the trial shall be concluded within a period of one year. We are surprised to note that notwithstanding the decision of the Constitution Bench in the case of High Court Bar Association, Allahabad vs. State of U.P. & Ors. (2024) INSC 150, the High Courts are issuing such directions without even considering that every criminal Court in the State of Bihar will have huge pendency”, the court said in its order.
A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih was dealing with an SLP against the HC’s order rejecting bail to the appellant.
The appellant is booked for alleged offences punishable under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the IPC and Section 66 of the IT Act.
The prosecution claimed that one co-accused caught by the police on Kiul Railway station, disclosed about his gang and that they were doing Cyber-crime. As per the prosecution, other co-accused persons have been arrested and several mobile phones, sim cards and ATM cards were recovered from their possession. The appellant is the alleged kingpin of the said crime.
On February 28, 2024, the High Court rejected bail but directed the trial court to conclude the trial of the petitioner within the period of one year. The HC granted liberty to the accused to renew his prayer for bail before the trial court if the trial is not concluded in a year.
“What kind of orders High Courts are passing? Decide within one year, this is contrary to judgement of Constitution bench”, Justice Oka remarked during the hearing.
The court noted that all the offences alleged against the accused are triable by the judicial magistrate. The trial will take a long time, the court noted, highlighting that whatever needed to be seized has already been seized.
The state contended that the accused is a habitual offender owing to four other cases against him and is a flight risk.
The court noted that the case is still at the stage of appearance of the accused, and he has been enlarged on bail in three antecedent cases against him.
Observing that the accused has been in custody since June 24, 2023, the court opined that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The court directed him to appear before the trial court within a week so that appropriate conditions for his release on bail can be set.
Case no. – Santosh Kumar @ Santosh v. State of Bihar and Anr.
Case title – SLP (Crl.) No. 6648/2024
Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 505
#law #legal #lawyers #lawyer #highcourt #lawschool #advocate #legalnews #justice #indianlaw #lawstudent #court #lawstudents #clat #india #supremecourtofindia #lawyerlife #lawyersofinstagram #judiciary #lawfirm #legalupdates #attorney #lawupdates #advocates #indianlawyer #news #lawmemes #lawnews #lawyerslife #airrnews #news #channel #india
