Mintu Kumar Das @ Pintu Kumar Das v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.28951 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -72 Year- 2010 Thana -SARAN GRP CASE District- SARAN ====================================================== Mintu Kumar Das @ Pintu Kumar Das Son of Gajadhar Das Resident of village - Jamla, Police Station - Mufassil, District - East Champaran (Motihari).

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Binod Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mrs. Sharda Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 09-01-2015 Heard both sides.

The petitioner, Mintu Kumar Das @ Pintu Kumar Das, seeks regular bail in Chapra Rail P.S. Case No.72 of 2010, registered under Sections 364 and 365 of the Indian Penal Code. Laxmi Mahto, the informant, alleged that some passengers took his son after hiring auto-rickshaw bearing BR04G-6774. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the first information report and nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and he is in jail for more than two years.

It appears from the perusal of the case diary that the petitioner, of course, is not named in the first information report, but one Perwez was apprehended as he was found using the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28951 of 2014 (4) dt.09-01-2015 2/2 mobile of the deceased. Perwez disclosed that he purchased the mobile from the petitioner on payment of Rs.500. Petitioner was arrested and he confessed his guilt. He also disclosed that he sold the auto-rickshaw to one Laxman Sah. The petitioner also confessed that he killed the driver of the auto-rickshaw by tying red towel around his neck and the dead body with red towel around the neck was found.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to grant bail. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within one year from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Pawan/- U T