Patna High CourtCR. MISC./20758/2017dismissed

Samsad @ Jumrati v. The State Of Bihar

2017-05-10Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.20758 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -154 Year- 2015 Thana -AIRPORT District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Samsad @ Jumrati, aged about 20 years S/o- Jafar, R/o Phulwari Sahrif, District- Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ghanshyam Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nawal Kishore Prasad (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 10-05-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Hawai Adda P.S. Case No. 154 of 2015, registered for offences punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner has not been named in the F.I.R, his name transpired during the course of investigation only on the basis confessional statement of co-accused and also on the basis of his own confessional statement before the police. Further no looted article has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. So far other criminal antecedents are concerned, he has been remanded in this case and has been made accused in other cases. Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides, in view of the fact that there is

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20758 of 2017 (2) dt.10-05-2017 2/2 self confession of the petitioner coupled with the fact that he has criminal antecedents, as such, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail, his application for regular bail is, accordingly, rejected.

However, since the petitioner has remained in judicial custody for about one year and three months, learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within a period of seven months and if the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail in the court below itself and if any such application is filed, the court below shall consider the same on the basis of materials available before him at that point of time and shall pass an appropriate order, without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T