Muslim Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.69130 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-344 Year-2017 Thana- BHABHUA District- Bhabhua (Kaimur) ====================================================== Muslim Ansari son of Asgar Ansari, resident of Village- Khanao, P.S.- Bhabua, District- Kaimur at Bhabua.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajani Kant Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 03-12-2018 Petitioner prays for bail in connection with Bhabua P.S. Case No. 344 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26(ii) and 35 of the Arms Act. Allegation against the petitioner is of manufacturing arms and ammunition and some articles for the manufacture of arms were recovered from the house of the petitioner and earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 8.3.2018 passed in Cr.Misc.No.13391 of 2018 by the then coordinate Bench of this Court considering the allegation as well as criminal antecedent of the petitioner.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the house is joint house and he has falsely been implicated in this case and he is in custody for one year six months. Heard learned APP also, who has opposed the prayer

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.69130 of 2018(2) dt.03-12-2018 2/2 for bail.

Having heard both sides and in view of allegation, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. However, since the petitioner is in custody for one year six months, as submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial by conducting it on regular basis so that the trial may be concluded at the earliest. At the same time, Superintendent of Police, Kaimur is directed to ensure the presence of the witnesses in court on the date fixed so that the trial may be concluded as early as possible.

With the above observation, this application is dismissed.

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