Patna High CourtCR. MISC./47894/2016dismissed

Mantu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2017-03-16Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.47894 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -65 Year- 2015 Thana -AMAS District- GAYA ====================================================== Mantu Singh, son of late Sheo Nandan Singh, resident of VillagePathara,P.S. Nagma, P.S. Imamganj, District Gaya. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Javed Jafar Khan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 16-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

This is an application for bail in connection with Amas P.S.Case No. 65 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act, including Section 17 of C.L.A. Act. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is not named in the FIR but later on his name transpires in this case and no specific overt act has been alleged against him. It has also been submitted that other co-accused have been granted bail by this Court in Cr.Misc.No. 47667 of 2016 and Cr.Misc.No. 28332 of 2016 vide orders dated 6.12.2016 and 27.9.2016 respectively and petitioner is in custody since 8.4.2016. Heard learned APP also, who has opposed the prayer

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47894 of 2016 (4) dt.16-03-2017 2/2 for bail and has drawn my attention towards paragraph-44 of the case diary in which name of the petitioner along with co-accused has been mentioned.

Having heard both sides and considering the fact that name of the petitioner has transpired in paragraph-44 of the case diary along with the fact that petitioner has been made accused in five other cases also, which is evident from paragraph-3 of the petition, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude the same within a period of nine months. If the trial is not concluded within the said period the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U