Patna High CourtCR. MISC./18114/2017dismissed

Nayim Nadaf @ Md. Nayim v. The State Of Bihar

2017-04-21Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.18114 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -57 Year- 2015 Thana -ANDHRATHARI District- MADHUBANI ======================================================

1. Nayim Nadaf @ Md. Nayim Son of late Nathuni Nadaf Resident of Village- Kamlabari, Police Station- Jaynagar, District- Madhubani. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Sharda Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 21-04-2017 The petitioner is in custody since 17.02.2017 in connection with Andhratharhi P.S. Case No. 57 of 2015, registered for offences punishable under Sections 396 and 397 of Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioner that he along with the co-accused entered into the house of informant and assaulted his grand father and father and due to which his father died. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has not been named in the F.I.R., he has been made accused in this case only on the basis of his confessional statement. No incriminating articles have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Petitioner has been in judicial custody since 17.02.2017.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18114 of 2017 (2) dt.21-04-2017 2/2 Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that petitioner has criminal antecedent and he is an accused in four other cases and all of them are of similar nature as the present one.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also petitioner has many criminal antecedents and that too are of similar nature as the present one, as such, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. His prayer for regular bail is, accordingly, rejected.

However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude the same as early as possible. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T