Bisho Mandal@ Bishakha Mandal@ Bishokh Mandal v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5057 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-322 Year-2019 Thana- NAYA RAM NAGAR District- Munger ====================================================== BISHO MANDAL@ BISHAKHA MANDAL@ BISHOKH MANDAL Son of Late Mannu Mandal Resident of Village - Naugachi, Bajarangbali Nagar, P.S.- Naya Ram Nagar, Distt.- Munger.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Kumar Kamal Nayan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Khurshid Anwar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 10-03-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner, in the present case, is seeking regular bail in connection with G.R. No. 3114 of 2019 arising out of Naya Ram Nagar P.S. Case No. 322 of 2019 registered for the offence under Sections 25(1-A), 25(1-AA), 25 (1-b), 26(i) (ii) of the Arms Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although in the Fardbeyan it is alleged that in course of search of the house of the petitioner police seized one plastic bag kept behind red trunk which contained one rusty country-made Katta, one live cartridge and one misfired cartridge and other equipments which are used in making firearms and are used in trigger of country-made pistol, the fact remains that there is no recovery from the conscious possession of the petitioner.
Learned counsel submits that the seizure list witnesses are the police personnel even though the house of the petitioner is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5057 of 2021(5) dt.10-03-2021 2/2 situated in the market area and there are several residential houses nearby.
Learned A.P.P. for the State is present and has opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, wherein the prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected for the reasons in the order dated 02.06.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 11304 of 2020 and at this stage the report of the learned trial court shows that the trial is likely to be concluded within six months, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of regular bail to this petitioner. Let the trial be expedited.
The learned trial court shall proceed with the trial to conclude the same preferably within a period of six months. If the trial remains unconcluded for no reason attributable to the petitioner, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail. The application is dismissed.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rishi/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.