Md. Arman Khan v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.64723 of 2018 (2) dt.29-10-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.64723 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -263 Year- 2018 Thana -PATNA CITY CHOWK District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Md. Arman Khan, Son of Md. Bhutto Khan, resident of Mohalla- Near Mogalpura Chowki Durukhi Par, Nai Sarak, P.S. Khajekalan, DistrictPatna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. S. Ehteshamuddin, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 29-10-2018 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Patna City Chowk P.S. Case No. 263/18, registered for offences punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation as per F.I.R. that informant boarded an Erickshaw from railway station and when the driver took the U-turn on bridge, informant told him that he has to go to Machharhatta, then the driver informed him that battery of the E-rickshaw failed and got him boarded in an Auto Rickshaw, in which, other persons were also sitting and the driver of the auto rickshaw after driving for a while, took the auto to bye-pass on which, informant raised alarm, the driver de-boarded and he was pick pocketed Rs. 1,00,000/-. Thereafter, the petitioner was apprehended and on his confession Rs. 5,000/- was recovered from the purse of his wife.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.64723 of 2018 (2) dt.29-10-2018 Apart from that petitioner is an accused in two more cases. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is not named in the F.I.R. and has falsely been made accused in this case and nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and he has been in judicial custody since 16.07.2018 and so far criminal antecedent is concerned, he is on bail in those cases.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that petitioner has criminal antecedents, at this stage, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail rather this application is disposed of with direction to the learned Trial Court to expedite and conclude the trial within a period of six months and if the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period and if there is no laches on the part of the petitioner, the Trial Court shall release the petitioner on bail to his own satisfaction with condition that he will cooperate in disposal of trial.

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