Patna High CourtCR. MISC./70534/2023bail rejected

Md. Hamsain @ Md. Gaus Rabbani v. The State Of Bihar

2023-12-22Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70534 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Md. Hamsain @ Md. Gaus Rabbani son of Late Rabbani @ Md. Rabbani Village- Sankherha Ps- Baheri Dist- Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Jha, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kumar Praveen, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 22-12-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Laherisarai (Darbhanga) Mahila P.S. Case No. 67 of 2021, lodged under Sections 376, 354B, 354C, 506 and 34 of the I.P.C. read with Section 65/67 of the Information Technology Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail application of the petitioner has earlier been rejected vide order dated 30.09.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 37106 of 2022. in which liberty was granted to renew his prayer for bail 6 months after framing of charge.

4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that charge has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70534 of 2023(3) dt.22-12-2023 2/2 already been framed on 25.01.2023 and six months has crossed.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that report has been called for.

6. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that out of 7 witnesses, 6 witnesses have been examined on 04.11.2023 and there is likelihood that all witnesses may have been examined.

7. Upon perusal of the report, it transpires that the trial court has expected that within 3 months, the trial shall be concluded.

8. In the present facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected with liberty that if trial shall not be concluded within six months, petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U