Md. Jawaid Akhtar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19994 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2024 Thana- CIVIL LINE District- Gaya ====================================================== Md. Jawaid Akhtar Son Of Md. Akhtar Resident Of Village- Gewal Bigha, P.S. - Rampur District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Braj Nandan Kumar Tiwary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Madhuri Lata, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 19-04-2024 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Civil Lines P.S. Case No. 10 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 413, 414, 467, 468 and 471/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant received a secret information that the shop of one Amir Motorcycle located on Chopda agency road where stolen motorcycle was selling and buying then the police party reached there then a person saw the police party started to flee away but he was apprehended by the police and he disclosed his name as Md. Javed and some judicial stamps paper have also been recovered from the said shop and thereafter some motorcycle have also been recovered from other place.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioner is in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19994 of 2024(3) dt.19-04-2024 2/2 custody since 09.01.2024.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. On perusal of the FIR, bail petition, seizure list and impugned order dated 12.02.2024, it appears that one black colour Hero Passion Pro motorcycle and many non judicial stamp papers have been recovered from the possession of the motorcycle shop of the accused-petitioner, which is serious offence against him and the petitioner has criminal antecedent also.

7. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and nature of offence, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail is hereby rejected.

9. However, the learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial 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, then the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the trial Court and the trial Court shall grant bail to him.

saurabhkr/- (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) U T