Pappu Sayee v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.63510 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2018 Thana- PHULWARIYA District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Pappu Sayee, Son of Jang Bahadur Sayee, resident of Village- Gaushiya, P.S.- Bhorey, District- Gopalganj.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dhramveer For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL ORAL ORDER 09-01-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Phulwaria P.S. Case No. 140 of 2018 registered under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code.

Petitioner is said to have been apprehended along with stolen motorcycle.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. As a matter of fact, he has taken the aforesaid motorcycle from his friend, namely, Mritunjay Kumar to visit doctor to accord medical aid to his wife without any knowledge of said motorcycle to be stolen one. He has been languishing in custody since 22.06.2018. On the other hand, learned APP opposing the bail prayer of the petitioner submitted that the aforesaid motorcycle

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.63510 of 2018(4) dt.09-01-2019 2/3 is stolen one. It is hailing to one Jai Narayan Yadav and said Jai Narayan Yadav has lodged Kotwali (Deoria) P.S. Case No. 488 of 2018 regarding theft of the aforesaid motorcycle and the aforesaid motorcycle has been released in his favour and petitioner was apprehended with the aforesaid motorcycle. The Petitioner has also criminal antecedent. Hence, he does not deserve bail.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer is rejected.

However, learned court below is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order fixing the case on day to day basis and S.P. Gopalganj is directed to ensure production of the witnesses in the case on each and every date fixed without fail.

Let a copy of this order be communicated to S.P. Gopalganj by fax for needful.

Petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail if the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period. (Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J) rohit/- U T

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.63510 of 2018(4) dt.09-01-2019 3/3