Irfan Ansari And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.41509 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -253 Year- 2016 Thana -CHAINPUR District- BHABHUA (KAIMUR) ====================================================== Ainul Ansari, Son of Late Taiyab Ansari, Resident of Village- Nainpura (Deuwa), P.S.- Chainpur, District- Kaimur at Bhabua. .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.41565 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -253 Year- 2016 Thana -CHAINPUR District- BHABHUA (KAIMUR) ======================================================
1. Irfan Ansari, Son of Muslim Ansari,
2. Yusuf Ansari @ Isuf Ansari, son of Islam Ansari,
3. Md. Husain Ansari, Son of Mohaeeddin Ansari, Resident of VillageNainpura, P.S.- Chainpur, District- Kaimur at Bhabua. .... .... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
(In Cr.Misc. No.41509 of 2017) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pawan Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Atul Chandra (In Cr.Misc. No.41565 of 2017) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Singh Shastriji ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 08-09-2017 Both the cases arise out of same P.S.Case number and they have been heard together and are being disposed of this common order.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners in both the cases.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41509 of 2017 (2) dt.08-09-2017 2/3 These applications have been filed for grant of bail in connection with Chainpur P.S. Case No. 253 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. Allegation is of firing.
Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that there is allegation of firing against the accused persons, including the petitioners in both cases on the injured but there is only two injuries on the person of injured, as such, there is no specific allegation attributed against them and they are in custody since 29.6.2017.
Heard learned APP and learned counsel for the informant, who have opposed the prayer for bail stating that injuries are grievous in nature and one co-accused has been refused bail in Cr.Misc.No. 4393 of 2017, vide order dated 3.4.2017 with a direction to trial court to expedite the trial and petitioner of that case was directed to renew his prayer after six months if no satisfactory progress in trial was made. Having heard both sides and in view of facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and petitioners may renew their prayer for bail after six
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41509 of 2017 (2) dt.08-09-2017 3/3 months.
With the above observation, these applications are dismissed.
(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U