Patna High CourtCR. MISC./9895/2017dismissed

Chandan Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.9895 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -211 Year- 2016 Thana -SAKRA District- MUZAFFARPUR ======================================================

1. Chandan Paswan, son of Veera Paswan, resident of village- Bhataulia (Paharpur), P.S.- Baligaon, District- Vaishali. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hans Lal Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Smt Indu Kumari Srivastava ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 03-03-2017 The petitioner is in custody since 07.08.2016 in connection with Sakra P.S. Case No. 211 of 2016, registered for offences punishable under Sections 25(1-b)A, 25(1-A), 25(1-AA), 25(1-AAA), 26 (2) and 35 of the Arms Act and 16, 17, 18, 20, 22 and 23 of U.A. P. Act.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that though there is allegation of recovery of two detonators from the possession of the petitioner, however he has sufficiently been punished as he has remained in judicial custody for about seven months. As regards other criminal antecedents of the petitioner, he is on bail in all other cases.

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides, in view of the recovery of two

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9895 of 2017 (2) dt.03-03-2017 2/2 detonators from the petitioner coupled with the fact that the petitioner has criminal antecedent as he is an accused in two other cases, as such, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner, the privilege of regular, at this state, it is accordingly rejected.] However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within a period of nine months and if the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail in the court below itself, which will be considered by the court below on the merit of the case, without being prejudiced by the order of this Court. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U