Surendra Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.21943 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -146 Year- 2016 Thana -ROSHANGAANJ District- GAYA ====================================================== Surendra Paswan Son of Sita Ram Paswan Resident of Village- Rebda, P.O. Patluka, P.S. Barachatti, Distt. Gaya.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. S. Jamil Akhtar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dinesh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 10-05-2017 This is an application for grant of bail for offences punishable under Sections 279, 411 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1-B)a/26 and 35 of the Arms Act, 17 (B) of the Excise Act and 17 of the C.L.A. Act.

Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other co-accused persons has looted one Petrol Pump. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has falsely been implicated in the present case. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Heard learned A.P.P. also. He has opposed the prayer for bail stating that this petitioner along with other accused persons has been arrested and from the possession of the petitioner

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21943 of 2017 (2) dt.10-05-2017 2/2 one loaded country made pistol and six live cartridges were recovered. Further, petitioner has criminal antecedent. Having heard both sides and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

However, since the petitioner is in custody for seven months, the trial court, Sherghati at Gaya, is directed to expedite the trial in connection with Roshanganj (Bankey Bazar) P. S. Case no. 146 of 2016 and conclude the same within a period of nine months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period, petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the court concerned.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sudip/- U T