IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr. Misc. No.45284 of 2010
1. MD. MANNAN son of Md. Abdul Rahman,
2. Md. Suleman son of Md. Abdul Rahman
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR
With
Cr. Misc. No. 30087 of 2010
MAINUL HAQUE @ MD.MAINUL @ MD.MAINUL HAQUE son of Abdul
Gaffar @ Gaffar Ali
Versus
STATE OF BIHAR
-----------
2/ 09.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.
The petitioners, Md. Mannan and Md. Suleman, were
refused bail by order dated 16.03.2010 passed in Cr. Misc. 4280 of
2010 since they were named in the inculpatory extra judicial
confession of the co-accused.
Since the counsel for the informant has apprised this
court of the fact that ten witnesses have already been examined
during trial, I am not inclined to review the said order. Their
application is once again rejected.
On behalf of the petitioner, Mainul Haque @ Md.
Mainul @ Md. Mainul Haque, it has been submitted that
inculpatory statement was retracted by the accused and, therefore, it
has no legal evidence. Further submission on his behalf is that he
was in the hospital on the relevant date of occurrence and this fact
was verified by the Investigating Officer as well.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not
inclined to grant bail to petitioner Mainul Haque @ Md. Mainul @
Md. Mainu Haque also. His prayer for bail is also rejected.
2
Counsel for the informant undertakes to produce the
Investigating Officer and the Doctor within three months next if he
is given Dasti summons with regard to them. In case the informant
fails to co-operate in disposal of the case, he shall be adequately
dealt with.
JA/- (Anjana Prakash,J.)