Patna High CourtCR. MISC./6359/2025dismissed

Md. Anas v. The State Of Bihar

2025-04-25Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6359 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-866 Year-2023 Thana- SHERGHATI District- Gaya ====================================================== Md. Anas son of Md. Mulla Aam @ Md. Mustafa Hussain @ Md. Murtaza Hussain Resident of village-Utri Malah Bigha, Islampur, P.S-Islampur, District- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Prabhakar Thakur, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 25-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Sherghati (Dhobhi) P.S. Case No. 866 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 21.06.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 27437 of 2024, which reads as under:

"Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered for the offence under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6359 of 2025(3) dt.25-04-2025 2/3

3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner along with other co-accused persons is accused of looting a petrol pump in the night.

4. Petitioner is accused in some cases and he is in jail since 25.09.2023. During investigation sufficient material have come to connect the petitioner with the crime.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this application for regular bail is rejected."\

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though charges have been framed but no witness has been examined as the petitioner is in custody since 25.09.2023, he may be released on bail.

5. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is accused of looting a petrol pump.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

8. The Sub Divisional Police Officer, Sherghati is directed to ensure the attendance of the witnesses on the date fixed in the trial. The Sub Divisional Police Officer, Sherghati will be held responsible for the delay in the trial if the witnesses are not produced by the police and appropriate order shall be passed against him.

9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6359 of 2025(3) dt.25-04-2025 3/3 Senior Superintendent of Police, Gaya forthwith through FAX or e-mail for its compliance.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) P. Kumar U T