Patna High CourtCR. MISC./11783/2017dismissed

Farman Mian And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

2017-03-29Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.11783 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -18 Year- 2017 Thana -MUFFASIL DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ======================================================

1. Farman Mian, son of Late Mlijaan Mian

2. Lal Mohammad @ Anil, son of Late Alijaan Mian

3. Khushi Alam @ Gabbar, son of Lajim Mian, All Resident of VillageTuniya, Police Station- Bettiah (M), Manuapul, District- West Champaran at Bettiah.

.... .... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Upadhyay Saurabh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 29-03-2017 It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that though petitioner No.1 has been granted provisional bail by this Court vide order dated 15.3.2017 but he has not deposited bail bond and, as such, he has not come out of jail and still he is in custody.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

This is an application for bail in connection with Bettiah (M) Manuapul P.S.Case No. 18 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11783 of 2017 (3) dt.29-03-2017 2/2 there is only allegation of recovery of stolen motorcycle and petitioners are in custody for more than two months. Heard learned APP also, who has opposed the prayer for bail stating that there is recovery of stolen motorcycle and there is criminal antecedent also.

Having heard both sides and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.

However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioners and try to conclude the same within a period of six months. If the trial is not concluded within the said period the petitioners may renew their prayer for bail. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U