Tajamul @ Tajjamul v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 26710 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -426 Year- 2005 Thana -ARARIA District- ARRARIA ====================================================== Tajamul @ Tajjamul S/o Arshad @ Arshad Ali resident of village - Paik, Tola Kastoli, P.S. & District - Araria .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Sri Satyadev Prasad Singh Yadav ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3.
12-07-2016 Heard Sri Anil Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Satyadev Prasad Singh Yadav, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.
The petitioner, who is in custody due to default, has prayed for grant of bail in Sessions Trial No. 243 of 2016 (arising out of Araria P.S. Case No. 426 of 2005) registered for the offence under Sections 427, 380, 506, 459, 323, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3 & 4 of the Explosives Substances Act, 1908 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
Earlier, the petitioner was granted bail by this Court on 22-02-2006, however; subsequently he jumped bail and his bail-bond was cancelled on 14-05-2008. Thereafter, he remained absconding. Finally, he was arrested on 14-03-2016. From the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26710 of 2016 (3) dt.12-07-2016 2/2 impugned order, it is evident that after arrest of the petitioner, the case was committed to the court of session and on 09-05-2006, charges have already been framed and summons have been issued for securing attendance of the witnesses.
Keeping in view the fact that after framing of charge, trial has already commenced and petitioner remained absconder for a long period, at this moment, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of bail.
The prayer for bail stands rejected.
While rejecting the prayer for bail, it is desirable to observe that learned trial court may take all steps so that trial may come to its logical end, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. (Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay U T