Chandan Kumar Singh @ Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.23069 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -33 Year- 2014 Thana -LALGANJ District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================

1. Chandan Kumar Singh @ Chandan Kumar, S/o Sri Chandeshvar Singh @ Chandeshwar Prasad Singh, R/o Village- Jarang Rampur, P.S.- Vaishali (O.P. Belsar), District- Vaishali.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Umesh Lal Verma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 30-06-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Lalganj P.S. Case No. 33 of 2014, registered for offences punishable under Section 399 and 402 of the Indian Penal Code. It appears from perusal of the record that earlier the petitioner has moved for grant of anticipatory bail and he was allowed anticipatory bail vide order dated 17.10.2014 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 24131 of 2014 as learned counsel for the petitioner has made submission that petitioner has only one criminal antecedent, however, Judicial Magistrate enquired about the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and it was found that he has five cases against him and consequently his bail bonds were cancelled and now the petitioner has moved for grant of regular bail.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23069 of 2017 (3) dt.30-06-2017 2/2 It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the report of the police with regard to criminal antecedent is itself not correct as petitioner has been acquitted in two other cases and in one other case, he was not accused and now he has been in custody since 08.02.2017.

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the conduct of the petitioner, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail, his application for regular bail is, accordingly, dismissed.

However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within a period of six 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. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T