Patna High CourtCR. MISC./54553/2016rejected

Japal Yadav @ Jaypal Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2017-01-31Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54553 of 2016 (3) dt.31-01-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.54553 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -240 Year- 2015 Thana -KATORIA District- BANKA ====================================================== Japal Yadav @ Jaypal Yadav, Son of Late Sital Yadav, Resident of Village- Madhuwan, P.S.- Saraiyahat, District- Dumka, at present resident of Village- Kumar Bank, P.S.- Katoria, District- Banka. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Nurul Hoda For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Rajesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 31-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Katoria (Jaipur) P.S. Case No. 240 of 2015 registered for the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegedly, in the house of the informant dacoity was committed wherein the petitioner was only identified and further the petitioner has confessed his guilt also during investigation. Submission is of false implication and that the alleged identification by the informant and others is doubtful, only due to enmity the informant had named the petitioner, the petitioner without any fault is suffering in custody since 12.03.2016 and as such the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration. Learned APP opposes the prayer of bail.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54553 of 2016 (3) dt.31-01-2017 In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering that the petitioner was identified in the occurrence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected.

Let the trial be expedited and concluded as early as possible, preferably within nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T