← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./34336/2017dismissed

Mumtaz @ Munna @ Mumtaz Alam @ Muntaz v. The State Of Bihar

2017-08-03Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.34336 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -387 Year- 2016 Thana -JOKIHAT District- ARRARIA ======================================================

1. Mumtaz @ Munna @ Mumtaz Alam @ Muntaz S/o Faiyaz , R/o Village- Nauwanankar, P.S.- Jokihat , District- Araria. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 03-08-2017 Heard the parties.

This application is for grant of regular bail in connection with Jokihat P.S.Case No.387 of 2016 (G.R.No.4152 of 2016) (Sessions Trial No.220 of 2017) for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498A, 364, 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and the allegation is of causing death of his second wife. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he has been named in this case only on the basis of suspicion and except that there is nothing against him. Now he is in custody for about seven years.

Heard learned A.P.P. also, who has opposed the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34336 of 2017 (3) dt.03-08-2017 2/2 prayer for bail on the ground that the petitioner has been made accused on the confession of the co-accused as well as the fact that the deceased had gone to the garage of the petitioner and since then she is traceless and now the session has also commenced. Having heard both sides and in view of the fact that sessions has commenced, as such I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, however, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within a period of nine months and if not concluded, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail bond before the court concerned. With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.

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