Patna High CourtCR. MISC./34513/2017rejected

Pintu Singh @ Pintoo Singh @ Satyajit Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2017-07-27Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34513 of 2017 (2) dt.27-07-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.34513 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -574 Year- 2016 Thana -SITAMARHI District- SITAMARHI ====================================================== Pintu Singh @ Pintoo Singh @ Satyajit Singh Son of Upendra Singh, R/o Village- Rajpur, P.S.- Majorganj, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uday Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Ashlam Ansari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 27-07-2017 The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 574 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under sections 399 and 402 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1-b) a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act.

Allegation against the petitioner alongwith co-accused is that they are making plan to loot the money after committing murder of pulse businessman.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is not named in the FIR, he has been implicated in this case only on the basis of confession and there is nothing against him. So far criminal antecedent is concerned but in all cases he is on bail. The petitioner has been in custody since 26.10.2016. Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail, he

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34513 of 2017 (2) dt.27-07-2017 pointed out that he is in accused in nine other cases. Having heard both sides, in view of the confession as well as criminal antecedent show that he is accused in nine other cases, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. However, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner within a period of six months. With the above observation, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) veena/- U T