Patna High CourtCR. MISC./26330/2017dismissed

Prabhat Kumar Ranjan @ Munna v. The State Of Bihar

2017-08-09Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26330 of 2017 (4) dt.09-08-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.26330 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -131 Year- 2017 Thana -SHASTRINAGAR District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Prabhat Kumar Ranjan @ Munna Son of Sagar Ram, Resident of Village- Bargachhiya, Police Station- Thawe, District- Gopalganj, at present Residing at Ashiana, Raza Bazar, Police Station- Shastri Nagar, DistrictPatna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arbind Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Amit Kumar Rakesh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 09-08-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Shastri Nagar P.S. Case No. 131 of 2017, registered for offences punishable under Sections 290, 294, 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of Prohibition of Immoral Traffic Act.

Allegation against the petitioner and other is of running brothel in a rented house.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has falsely been implicated in this case and another co-accused having similar allegation has already been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.07.2017, passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 30528 of 2017 and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26330 of 2017 (4) dt.09-08-2017 petitioner has been in judicial custody for last five months. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that petitioner was apprehended on spot and on search a diary was recovered in which several numbers of different girls were found.

Having heard both sides, considering the fact and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail, his application for regular bail is, accordingly, rejected.

However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within a period of six 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. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T