Patna High CourtCR. MISC./8915/2017dismissed

Ranjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2017-04-03Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.8915 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -286 Year- 2016 Thana -MAHUA District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Ranjeet Kumar, S/o Shyam Narayan Thakur, resident of village - Pachrukhi, P.S. Lalganj, Distt. - Vaishali .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Informant : Mr. M.C.Gandhi. Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 03-04-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

This is an application for bail in connection with Mahua P.S.Case No. 286 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 394 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that though there is alleged recovery of Rs. 39,800/- from the possession of the petitioner, which is looted money, and for that another case has been lodged being Mahua P.S.case No.287 of 2016 but in that case petitioner has been released on bail and petitioner is in custody in this case since 1.9.2016. It has further been submitted that he has been remanded in this case from the said case and co-accused having similar allegation has been granted bail by this Court.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8915 of 2017 (3) dt.03-04-2017 2/2 Heard learned APP and learned counsel for the informant also stating about the complicity of the petitioner. Having heard both sides and considering the fact that there is recovery of looted money as well as involvement of the petitioner in two other cases and the co-accused having been granted bail has no criminal antecedent, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Prayer for bail is rejected. However, as the petitioner is in custody for the last more than six months, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and try to conclude the same within a period of one year.

This application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U