Md. Nayeem Khan @ Tipu Khan @ Nayeem Khan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.27845 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -448 Year- 2015 Thana -CIVIL LINE District- GAYA ====================================================== Md. Nayeem Khan @ Tipu Khan @ Nayeem Khan, Son of Md. Salim Khan, Resident of Fatehpur Badrichak, P.S.- Gomta, District- Dhanbad (Jharkhand), At present resident of Road No. 95, house of Dr. Mustak, Aliganj, District- Gaya. .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Kunwar Narayan Jamuar, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh 1(APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 09-11-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner is in custody since 07.04.2016 in connection with Civil Line P.S. Case No. 448 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
Case diary in the present case was called for, which has since been received.
It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he was an employee of the informant and was in the business of sending people abroad and had taken money from several parties. It was only on account of the fact that his conduct itself came under a cloud that he has thrown the entire claim against the present petitioner making false and frivolous allegation.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.27845 of 2016 (6) dt.09-11-2016 2/2 Counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender and he also taken money from several other persons in the State of Jharkhand and thereafter come to Bihar and had started the same business here. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that the investigation reveals that the petitioner has now been indulging in such practices as several witnesses came forward to depose against the present petitioner. In view of such facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on regular bail. It is, accordingly, rejected.
In view of the report submitted by the trial court, it is directed that the trial of the present case be disposed of expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from today. It is made clear that the court shall not grant any adjournments either to the prosecution or the defence and shall proceed on day to day basis so that the trial is concluded within the aforesaid period.
(Anjana Mishra, J.) ravi/- U T