Patna High CourtCR. MISC./32639/2015rejected

Md. Ekhlaque @ Akhlaque v. The State Of Bihar

2015-12-02Mr. Justice Ashwani Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.32639 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -178 Year- 2014 Thana -KISHANGANJ District- KISANGANJ ======================================================

1. Md. Ekhlaque @ Akhlaque Son of Safiur Rahman resident of villageGadhaira,Police station Amour, distt Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Firoz Ahmad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Renuka Ratnakar(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02-12-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail in connection with Kishanganj P.S. Case No. 178 of 2014 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

The prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 15.10.2014 passed in Cr.Misc. No. 35939 of 2014 and analogous cases. By order dated 26.08.2015, a report was called for from the court below as to why charges have not been framed. The trial court has submitted its report dated 29th September, 2015. It would appear from perusal of the report that the charges

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32639 of 2015 (4) dt.02-12-2015 2/2 have already been framed against the accused persons on 01.09.2015 and the witnesses have been summoned to adduce evidence.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that some of the co-accused having more or less identical allegation have already been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court.

Be that as it may, regard being had to the reasons assigned in the aforesaid order dated 15th October, 2015, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner for the present. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected.

The trial court is directed to hold the trial of the petitioner on day-to-day basis and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably within seven months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order, failing which the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the court below itself.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Pradeep/- U T