Md. Mutaquim @ Mustakim @ Mustakim Miyan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63710 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2006 Thana- PATLIPUTRA District- Patna ====================================================== MD. MUTAQUIM @ MUSTAKIM @ MUSTAKIM MIYAN S/o Late Kariman @ Late kariman Miyan @ Md. Karim R/o village- Teknari, P.S.- Patepur, District- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mrs.Madhuri Kumari For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-06-2020 Due to COVID-19 Pandemic, the matter is being taken up by way of virtual Court proceeding.

The matter has been listed under the heading 'For Orders' under the orders of Hon'ble the Chief Justice. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered under Sections 396 and 412 of the I.P.C.

The prosecution case, in short, is that unknown miscreants looted away valuable household properties from the house of one Papiya Ghosh and committed murder of Papiya Ghosh and her made-servant.

Earlier bail application of the petitioner was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63710 of 2019(3) dt.03-06-2020 2/3 rejected vide Annexure 1 to the present application taking into account that the petitioner absconded for a long period. A coordinate Bench of this Court was directed to conclude the trial within a period of eight months.

A report was called for from the trial court. It has been reported that eight prosecution witnesses have been examined on behalf of the prosecution.

Counsel for the petitioner in paragraph 15 of the petitioner has categorically stated that out of 40 witnesses only seven witnesses have been examined. There is no chance of trial being concluded in near future.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 18.08.2012 and has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses against the petitioner. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. His name has transpired in this case on confessional statement of co-accused Shankar Sao. The petitioner has remained in custody for approximately eight years. No T.I.P. of the petitioner has been made. Hence no offence under Section 396 of I.P.C. is made out. Some common house hold articles are said to have been recovered which were put on T.I.P. and the said house hold articles were said to have been identified by the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63710 of 2019(3) dt.03-06-2020 3/3 witnesses. Taking into said account, at best an offence under Section 412 of I.P.C. is only made out. Ohter co-accused has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Annexure 4 to the present application.

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the lockdown, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on his personal bond to the satisfaction of Additional District and Sessions Judge VII, Patna in connection with Sessions Trial No.1015 of 2012 arising out of Patliputra P.S. case No.216 of 2006.

Once the normalcy is restored, the petitioner shall furnish bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each within a period of four weeks to the satisfaction of the court concerned in connection with the aforesaid case.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Narendra/- U T