Patna High CourtCR. MISC./23534/2017dismissed

Ram Singh And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2017-05-17Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.23534 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -30 Year- 2016 Thana -JAMOBAZAR District- SIWAN ======================================================

1. Ram Singh, Son of Vidyarathi Singh, resident of Village Chandparsa, P.S. Kesharia, District- East Champaran.

2. Mukesh Kumar Sahani, son of Gyanchand Sahani, resident of Village Bhagawtia, P.S. Kesharia, District- East Champaran. .... .... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 17-05-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

This is an application for bail in connection with Jamo Bazar P.S.Case No. 30 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation as per FIR is that co-accused person approached the informant, who has withdrawn Rs.20,000/- from Bank, and on the pretext that the notes are forged he has taken the entire amount from the informant and thereafter he fled away. It further appears that petitioner is not named in the FIR and during course of investigation his name transpires.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23534 of 2017 (2) dt.17-05-2017 2/2 except confessional statement there is nothing against the petitioner and there is no recovery from the petitioner. So far criminal antecedent is concerned, it has been submitted that petitioner has been remanded in this case and he is in custody since 2.4.2017.

Heard learned APP also.

Having heard both sides and considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and also considering the criminal antecedent, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude the same within a period of six months. If trial is not concluded within the said period, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the court below itself, which shall be considered on its own merit, without being prejudiced by this order.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U