Anil Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.1005 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -42 Year- 2016 Thana -SITAMARHI District- SITAMARHI ======================================================

1. Anil Sah Son of Sri Mohan Sah Resident of Village- Bharpha Ishwar Das, P.S. Mejerganj, District- Sitamarhi.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aditya Kumar Singh Mr. Ritesh Kumar Narain Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Madhuri Lata ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 21-02-2017 Heard the parties.

This application is for grant of bail in connection with Sitamarhi P.S.Case No.42 of 2016 for the offence under Sections 385 and 387 of the Indian Penal Code.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that except suspicion, there is nothing against the petitioner and later on his confessional statement has been recorded in this case, even Mobile by which, it is alleged 'Rangdari' was demanded, belongs to one Rajesh Kumar. The petitioner is in custody for about 11 months. Heard, the learned A.P.P., who has opposed the prayer for bail, stating that the SIM, which has been used in the Mobile is of the petitioner and he is accused in four other cases of the similar type also.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1005 of 2017 (3) dt.21-02-2017 2/2 Having heard both sides. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the SIM, which has been used in the Mobile for demand of the 'Rangdari' contains the photograph of this petitioner along with the fact that there is suspicion against the petitioner also. He is accused in four other cases also. Considering the aforesaid fact, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, however, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within a period of nine months and if not concluded, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail, however, in the meantime, the S.P., Sitamarhi is directed to produce witnesses on each and every date fixed by the court concerned and strictly to comply the direction of this Court so that the case may be disposed of within a period as specified.

With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U