IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.30577 of 2007 BINDESHWARI YADAV @ BINDESHWARI PRASAD SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 6. 07.11.2008 Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the State. This is unfortunate that a case which was registered on 17/3/1986 has still not reached it’s destination as the trial has not been concluded as yet. Bikram P.S. Case No. 81/86 was registered for offence u/Ss 302, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. The informant, Ram Ekwal Singh is an eye witness and as per his statement, Binda Yadav has fired due to which his brother, Vidya Prasad died at the spot. It seems that after institution of case, a ten years boy who is brother of this petitioner was produced before the court stating that he is Binda Yadav who is minor. The allegation made against Binda Yadav, is that he fired on deceased, but considering his age, trial cannot be conducted under the provisions of the Cr.P.C. In course of investigation, this petitioner has been shown as absconder. In the absconder register, as per the order dated 20/11/06 which is the impugned order, Binda Yadav @ Bindeshwari Yadav is an absconder. This petitioner was forwarded before the court as Binda Yadav - 2 - @ Bindeshwari Yadav. Subsequently, some documents have been created to show that Binda Yadav and Bindeshwari Yadav are two different persons. All those documents cannot be considered at this stage, which certainly have been created as evidence. Counsel for the petitioner has tried to emphasize that since Binda Yadav is a different person who is minor as such, prosecution against this petitioner is not proper and an abuse of the process of the court. Considering all these facts, I do not find any error in the order dated 20.11.2006. However, this is a very sorrowful state of affairs that a case which was registered in the year, 1986, has yet not been committed to the court of sessions, as informed by the counsel for the petitioner. If commitment has not been done, it should be done at once because even after filing Cr. Misc. No. 30577 of 2007, no stay order was granted by this court. There was no reason for the court below not to proceed with the matter. The court should proceed at once and the trial be concluded without any delay as soon as possible. This application is dismissed. AKV/ (Mridula Mishra,J.)