Sukil Kumar Sahani @ Sakil Sahani @ Sukil Sahani @ Sakil Kumar Sahani v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.31133 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -43 Year- 2013 Thana -JANDAHA District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Sukil Kumar Sahani @ Sakil Sahani @ Sukil Sahani @ Sakil Kumar Sahani, son of Late Dhana Sahani, resident of Village- Maksudan Pakri, P.S.- Lalganj, District-Vaishali.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. North Bihar Gramin Bank , through its Managing Director .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Niraj Kumar, Advocate For the Bank : Mr. Prabhakar Jha, Advocate For the State : Md. Matloob Rab (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 08-09-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S.Tr. No. 376 of 2013 arising out of Jandaha P.S Case No. 43 of 2013 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 412 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner wants to renew the prayer of bail which was earlier twice rejected by order dated 14.11.2013 and 07.010.2015 passed in Cri. Misc. No. 35844 of 2013 and Cri. Misc. No. 38170 of 2014, on the ground that petitioner is in custody since 02.03.2013 and in near future the trial is not likely to be concluded. Nine prosecution witnesses have been examined

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.31133 of 2016 (3) dt.08-09-2016 2/2 and all have turned hostile.

Learned APP duly assisted by the learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer of bail by submitting that in near future the trial is likely to be concluded.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering that the petitioner was apprehended after chase with looted bank's money and loaded pistol, again prayer of bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same preferably within four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Rajiv/- U T