Patna High CourtCR. MISC./45025/2015rejected

Md. Ikbal v. The State Of Bihar

2015-10-07Mr. Justice Ashwani Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45025 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -101 Year- 2014 Thana -MUNGER MUFFASIL District- MUNGER ====================================================== Md. Ikbal, Son of Md. Motiur Rahman, resident of village - Bardah, P.S.- Muffasil, District - Munger .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rounak Kumar Singh "Pankaj" Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Lallan Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 07-10-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sessions Case No. 135/15 arising out of Muffasil P.S. Case No. 101 of 2014 registered under Sections 25(1-B)(a), 25(1-AA), 26(i)(ii) and 35 of the Arms Act.

The prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court.

According to the prosecution, two persons were sitting on one motorcycle and one person was on another motorcycle and on seeing the police party they fled away. The police apprehended them and on query, they disclosed their

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45025 of 2015 (2) dt.07-10-2015 2 / 2 name as Md. Irshad, Pankaj Kumar Choudhary and Md. Ikbal (Petitioner) and on search, 15 semi-finished pistols, 15 barrels kept in a bag were recovered. Accordingly, the seizure list was prepared.

It is contended that the petitioners have been falsely implicated. Though the petitioner is in custody since 28th May, 2014, till date only two witnesses have been examined during trial.

Be that as it may, regard being had to the serious nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected. The trial Judge is directed to hold the trial of the case on day-to-day basis and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably within nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order failing which the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the court below itself.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.) Sanjeet/- U T