Mintu Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50366 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2020 Thana- KHANPURA District- Samastipur ====================================================== Mintu Paswan Son of Saryug Paswan, R/o Village- Nathudwar, PS- Khanpur, Dist- Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Piyush Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-12-2024 Heard Mr. Piyush Kumar Pandey, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2.

Petitioner seeks regular bail who is in custody since 09.02.2024 in connection with G.R. No. 2791 of 2020, arising out of Khanpur P.S. Case No. 216 of 2020, FIR dated 15.11.2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 364, 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. 3.

According to the prosecution case, the son of informant used to have altercations with one Neeraj Paswan, who used to threaten him to remove his gumti from the disputed land or he will be abducted and killed. It is further alleged that one day the said Neeraj Paswan took informant's son, and the informant's son never returned back.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50366 of 2024(5) dt.13-12-2024 2/3 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation levelled in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He lastly submits that as per allegation in the FIR, there is no direct allegation against the petitioner.

5.

Vide order dated 22.11.2024, a report was called for with regard to the stage of the trial and report dated 29.11.2024 of the learned trial Court reveals that altogether seven witnesses including the informant and investigating officer has been examined and the case is pending for the examination of the doctor.

6.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the other hand has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

7.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the nature of allegation levelled in the FIR as well as the report of the learned trial Court, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Khanpur P.S. Case No. 216 of 2020, pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge-V, Samastipur.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50366 of 2024(5) dt.13-12-2024 3/3 8.

Prayer is refused.

9.

However, the learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Shahnawaz/- U T