Sagir Miya @ Sagir Husain v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15747 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-507 Year-2023 Thana- BETTIAH CITY District- West Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Sagir Miya @ Sagir Husain, Gender- Male, aged about 58 years, Son of Late Fida Husain R/o Kali Bagh, Garwan Toli, P.S.- Kali Bagh O.P., DistrictWest Champaran 2.

Rustam Ansari, Gender-Male, aged about 40 years, Son of Sagir Miya R/o Kali Bagh, Garwan Toli, P.S.- Kali Bagh O.P., District- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Umesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 13-03-2024 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

2.

The petitioners seek bail in connection with Bettiah Nagar P.S. Case No.-507 of 2023 registered for the offence under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 11(1)(a)(b)(c) (d) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.

3. As per the prosecution case, it is a case of stealing of cattle and they are alleged to be cattle smugglers. 4.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioners are in custody since 13.12.2023 and 14.12.2023 respectively.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15747 of 2024(2) dt.13-03-2024 2/2 5.

Learned APP appearing for the State, opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners. 6.

From perusal of the first information report, seizure list as well as impugned order dated 25.01.2024, it appears that the petitioners are named in the FIR and seven cattle were recovered from the possession of the petitioners as a stolen property and no proper explanation has been given by the petitioners and petitioners having several criminal antecedents and it includes several types of offences including heinous offences of same nature, in these circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.

7. Prayer for bail of the petitioners is hereby rejected.

8. However, the trial Court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and if the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period, the petitioners may renew their prayer for bail before the trial Court and the trial Court shall grant bail to the petitioners.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T