Md. Majloom @ Pagala @ Pagla v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.381 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2022 Thana- PRANPUR District- Katihar ====================================================== Md. Majloom @ Pagala @ Pagla Son of Late Jafoor @ Late Gafoor Resident of Village - Siranda, P.S.- Pranpur, District - Katihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Md Musowir, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-03-2024 Heard Mr. Md. Musowir, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Upendra Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 06.03.2022 in connection with S.T. No. 282 of 2022 arising out of Pranpur P.S. Case No. 25 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 16.02.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 379, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code but later on police submitted the charge sheet under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 302, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 25.04.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 56915 of 2022. Thereafter, the petitioner has again moved before this Hon'ble Court in Cr. Misc. No. 73461 of 2023 which

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.381 of 2024(3) dt.01-03-2024 2/3 was dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to the petitioner to move before the learned Trial Court vide order dated 10.11.2023.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the informant has been examined and in his deposition he has not supported the case of the prosecution and only on this ground the petitioner seeks bail in the present case.

5. Vide order dated 19.01.2024 a report was called with regard to the present stage of trial. Report of the learned Trial Court dated 12.02.2024 (but it is mentioned as 12.02.2023 in the report) reveals that out of 15 chargesheet witnesses, 7 witnesses have already been examined and one non-chargesheet witnesses has also been examined.

6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as report of the learned Trial Court and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with S.T. No. 282 of 2022 arising out of Pranpur P.S. Case No. 25 of 2022 pending in the court of learned Additional

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.381 of 2024(3) dt.01-03-2024 3/3 District Judge III-cum-Special Judge, Katihar, District- Katihar.

8. Prayer is refused.

9. However, learned Trial Court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial at the earliest.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T