Ram Bhajan Sahni @ Bhajjo Sahni @Bhajjo Saho v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.57578 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -150 Year- 2009 Thana -BEGUSARAI TOWN District- BEGUSARAI ====================================================== RAM BHAJAN SAHNI @ BHAJJO SAHNI @BHAJJO SAHO .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Naresh Dass For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Renu Kumari(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 22-12-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner is languishing in jail custody since 30-092015 in a case registered under Sections-392, 411 of the Indian Penal Code and 25(i-B)a, 27 of the Arms Act.

Petitioner is named in the first information report on the basis that just after the occurrence, the motorcycle used in the present crime, was recovered by the police and from the dicky of the aforesaid motorcycle, one Photostat copy of Driving Licence of the petitioner was recovered. The informant identified the petitioner after showing his photographs on the Photostat copy of Driving Licence. Moreover, petitioner could be remanded in this case in the year, 2015 particularly, in the circumstance, when the occurrence had taken place in the year, 2009.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57578 of 2015 (2) dt.22-12-2015 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that coaccused have already been acquitted after full-fledged trial. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submission of the parties, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail and accordingly, his prayer for bail in connection with Begusarai Town P.S. Case No. 150 of 2009 pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai stands rejected.

However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably, within six months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order and if, trial of the petitioner is not concluded within the above-said period, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the learned trial court itself. (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) A.K.V./- U T