Badal @ Madhav Mrinal @ Badal Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.20217 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -194 Year- 2016 Thana -KISHUNPUR District- SUPAUL ======================================================

1. Badal @ Madhav Mrinal @ Badal Yadav Son of Murlidhar Yadav Resident of Village- Narayanpur, P.S. Janki Nagar, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar Sinha, Mr. Ashok Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 17-07-2017 Heard the parties.

This application is for grant of regular bail in connection with Kishanpur P.S.Case No.194 of 2016, registered for the offences punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and the allegation against the petitioner is that one motor cycle has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the stolen motorcycle has been recovered from the other coaccused person, who has been granted bail by this Court, vide order dated 18.5.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. 16975 of 2017 and though the said motorcycle has been recovered from the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20217 of 2017 (4) dt.17-07-2017 2/2 possessions of the petitioner but he has annexed an owner book but it could not be replied that the same was produced at the time of investigation for its verification. Further submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that though he is accused in a large number of cases but in this case, there is no direct allegation against him. The petitioner is in custody for about nine months. Heard learned A.P.P. also, who has opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that he is accused in 12 other cases of similar and serious nature.

Having heard both sides and in view of allegation, as stated above, as well as apart from recovery, there is criminal antecedent of the petitioner and he is accused in 12 other cases. Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, however, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within a period of nine months.

With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U