Patna High CourtCR. MISC./36912/2017rejected

Md. Rashid @ Pappu v. The State Of Bihar

2017-10-04Mr. Justice Hemant Kumar Srivastava2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36912 of 2017 (3) dt.04-10-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.36912 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -64 Year- 2016 Thana -GAYA MUFFSIL District- GAYA ======================================================

1. Md. Rashid @ Pappu, son of Late Md. Ishak @ Ishhak Mian, Resident of Mohalla- Nauranga, P.S.- Muffasil, District- Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashhar Mustafa For the State :. Mr. R.P.S. Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 04.10.2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner seeks renewal of his bail on the ground of long incarceration in jail as well as stage of his trial but taking note of the fact that in huge quantity, arms and ammunitions were recovered from his possession, again, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail and hence, his prayer for bail in connection with Mufassil P.S. Case no. 64/2016 stands rejected.

However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and try to conclude the same as early as possible, preferably, within four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order even by

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36912 of 2017 (3) dt.04-10-2017 taking trial of the petitioner on day to day basis. Let copy of this order be sent to Senior Superintendent of Police, Gaya with direction to him to ensure the presence of prosecution witnesses of Mufassil P.S. Case no. 64/2016 before Sri Amrendra Kumar Raj, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Gaya so that the aforesaid court could conclude trial of the petitioner within the period as fixed by this court. It is made clear that if prosecution fails to produce his witnesses within the above stated period and due to laches of the prosecution, trial of the petitioner is not concluded, petitioner may renew his payer for bail before this court.

shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J) U T