Patna High CourtCR. MISC./9578/2017dismissed

Md. Naushad @ Nasia v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-04-11Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.9578 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2 Year- 2016 Thana -PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Md. Naushad @ Nasia, S/o Late Md. Tauheed, Resident of VillageMirzapur Bardah, P.S.- Muffasil, District- Munger. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Mr. U.K. Gautam, Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Govt. of India, 1st Floor, Chandpura Place, Bank, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna800001. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Pd. Singh, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Meena Singh, Adv.

For the Informant :

Mr. Amsuman Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 11-04-2017 Heard the parties.

This application is for grant of bail in connection with Spl. Tr. No.(PML Act 02/2016 arising out of Complaint Case No.02 of 2016, ECIR No.PT20/08/2013 for the offence under Section 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that with respect to the land, proceedings have been initiated, as mentioned at page 27 of the F.I.R.

So far as Item No.1 is concerned, it has been purchased prior to birth of the petitioner, Item No.2 is concerned, he has no concern with the same and in respect of Item No.3, it has been

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9578 of 2017 (2) dt.11-04-2017 2/2 submitted that it has been purchased by the petitioner, as such, he has been falsely implicated in the present proceeding. Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides and perusal of the record, it appears that the present proceeding has been initiated under Section 4 of the Money Laundering Act, 2002 and the petitioner is accused in 19 other cases.

Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, however, considering the fact that he is in custody, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within a period of one year and if not concluded, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U