Petitioner sought bail in an Arms Act case, claiming recent arrest after years of bail bond cancellation due to non-surrender. Court refused bail, directing trial within four months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26698 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-310 Year-2001 Thana- HAJIPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY, Son of Shyam Bihari Pandey @ Bihari Pandey, Resident of Village - Raghunathpur, P.S.- Raghunathpur, Distt.Siwan.
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Bela Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Surendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER
3 23-05-2019 Petitioner seeks bail in connection with Hajipur Town P.S. Case No. 310 of 2001, corresponding to Trial No. 282 of 2018, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.
This is a case of misuse of privilege of bail of 16
years.
Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner had gone outside for earning his livelihood and handed over the case to his pairvikar but he has not made pairvi and as such his bail bond has been cancelled and he has been arrested on 27.11.2018 and since then he is in custody.
Heard learned APP and perused the record from which it appears that petitioner has left pairvi and his bail bond
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26698 of 2019(3) dt.23-05-2019 2/2
was cancelled in 2002 and after exhausting all the processes he was declared absconder in 2018 but he has not surrendered, rather he has been arrested.
In view of above facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within four months. If trial is not concluded within the said period, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the trial court itself.
With the above observation, this application is dismissed.
(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J)
spal/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner who was absconding and had his bail bond cancelled years ago?
Whether the trial should be expedited to conclude the proceedings?
Rakesh Kumar Pandey
The State of Bihar
Vinod Kumar Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
