Ranjeet Mishra @ Nanhe Mishra v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17810 of 2016 (3) dt.27-06-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.17810 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -7 Year- 2015 Thana -PHULPARAS District- MADHUBANI ====================================================== Ranjeet Mishra @ Nanhe Mishra, son of Manindra Mishra, Resident of village- Dakuli, P.S.- Bahadurpur, District- Darbhanga.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. P.K.Panday (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 27-06-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Phulparas P.S. Case No. 07 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 400, 414 of the Indian Penal Code & 25 (1A)26, 35 of the Arms Act.

Allegedly, some criminals looted a shop near Belha village thereafter the informant and other police personnel caught the petitioner, whereas other succeeded in fleeing away and from possession of the petitioner one country made loaded pistol, one semi automatic pistol having four live cartridges, 43 tablets, two mobiles and further looted sewing machine was also recovered and the petitioner disclosed the name of other co-accused.

Submission is of false implication and that the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17810 of 2016 (3) dt.27-06-2016 petitioner has been made victim of the circumstances, nothing has been recovered from his possession, the police obtained signature of the petitioner on plain paper, he has got no concern to the alleged occurrence and he is in custody since 07.01.2015. The learned APP opposes the prayer of bail by submitting that the petitioner has got criminal antecedents as he is involved in eight more cases and the petitioner has confessed his guilt.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the allegation and criminal antecedents, at present, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected in connection with Phulparas P.S. Case No. 07 of 2015 pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M. , Jhanjharpur, Madhubani.

However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order after taking the same on priority basis, failing which the petitioner may be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) khushbu/veena U T