Farman Mian @ Farman Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58835 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-176 Year-2019 Thana- RAMNAGAR District- West Champaran ====================================================== FARMAN MIAN @ FARMAN ANSARI S/o Late Alijan Mian R/o Village - Taniya, P.S. - Manuapul, District - West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Anand Mohan Prasad Mehta, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 27-04-2022 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Let the defect(s) be removed within two weeks of the complete start of the physical Court in normal course. Petitioner, who is in custody since 05.09.2019, seeks regular bail in connection with Ramnagar P.S. Case No. 176 of 2019 registered for offences punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

Prosecution story in brief is that informant had parked his motorcycle bearing Registration No. BR-22-S0-51111 near Shiv Mandir and went to see fair. When he returned, he found motorcycle was missing from the place where he had parked. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58835 of 2021(2) dt.27-04-2022 2/2 submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He has neither named in the FIR nor any stolen article has been recovered from his possession. Petitioner is in custody since 05.09.2019 and deserves to be released on bail. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Having considered the allegation made in the FIR, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, taking into consideration the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, who is involved in more than dozen cases for having committed offence under Section 379, 413 and 414 it would not be in public interest to release the petitioner on bail at this stage. The trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

If no substantial progress takes place in conduct of trial, the petitioner, if so advised, may renew his prayer for bail. Accordingly, the present bail application is dismissed. (Purnendu Singh, J) Niraj/- U T