Patna High CourtCR. MISC./49914/2024dismissed

Sanjay Kumar Sah @ Sanjay Sah @ Sanjay Singhaniya v. The State Of Bihar

2024-08-02Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49914 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2022 Thana- KALUAHI District- Madhubani ====================================================== Sanjay Kumar Sah @ Sanjay Sah @ Sanjay Singhaniya Son of Ramaprit Sahu @ Ramaprit Sah @ Ramaprit Singh RESIDENT OF VILLAGEKORAHIYA, P.S.- JAYNAGAR, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Subhash Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 02-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The following order was passed on 29.11.2023 in Cr. Misc. No. 74458 of 2023:- "Heard Sri Subhash Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Awadhesh Kumar Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. This application for grant of regular bail arises out of Kalauhi P.S. Case No. 21 of 2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The petitioner and other criminals are accused of looting the informant in broad daylight. The petitioner is also accused in six more similar cases.

4. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no evidence against the petitioner and similarly situated co-accused have been granted bail.

5. Considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner as also the fact that the loot is of huge amount of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49914 of 2024(2) dt.02-08-2024 2/2 Rs.7,00,000/-, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of regular bail even though other co-accused have been granted bail. Accordingly, this application is rejected.

6. The District Judge, Madhubani is directed to get the trial of all the cases registered against the petitioner expedited at the earliest."

3. The petitioner submits that the charge has been framed on 10.11.2023, but no witness has been examined and the petitioner is in jail since 22.06.2023.

4. Considering the fact that the petitioner is accused of committing loot in broad daylight, I am not inclined to grant him bail. This application is dismissed.

5. The Superintendent of Police, Madhubani is directed to produce the witnesses regularly in the court below. There should be no delay in the trial. If there is any delay, the Superintendent of Police, Madhubani shall be held responsible.

6. Let a copy of the order be communicated to the Superintendent of Police, Madhubani through FAX/e-mail forthwith for compliance of the order.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Saif/- U T