Patna High CourtCR. MISC./6576/2017dismissed

Md. Ehshan @ Md. Shan @ Shan v. The State Of Bihar

2017-02-21Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.6576 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -100 Year- 2016 Thana -SITAMARHI District- SITAMARHI ====================================================== Md. Ehshan @ Md. Shan @ Shan S/o Late Md. Nisar, Resident of VillageMehsaul, P.S.- Sitamarhi, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amit Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 21-02-2017 It has been submitted by Mr. Amit Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner, that correction has been in the court below itself and nothing has been made by the petitioner. Considering the aforesaid submission, the defect is ignored at the risk of the petitioner.

This is an application for bail in connection with Sitamarhi P.S.Case No. 100 of 2016 for the offences punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and he is in custody since 14.11.2016 and so far as criminal antecedent is concerned, petitioner is on bail in all these cases. Heard learned APP also, who has opposed the prayer

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6576 of 2017 (3) dt.21-02-2017 2/2 for bail stating that there are materials against the petitioner and against him there are nine other cases.

Having considered the fact that witnesses have named this petitioner as he has committed theft of motorcycle and there are nine cases against him, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

Learned Trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within nine months. If the trial is not concluded within the said period, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail in the court below itself, who will consider the same on its own merit, without being prejudiced by this order. With the above observations, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U