Yogi Mahto @ Jogi Mahto @ Chhotu @ Mamu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2522 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2022 Thana- BARAUNI District- Begusarai ====================================================== Yogi Mahto @ Jogi Mahto @ Chhotu @ Mamu, S/O Raj Kumar Mahto, Resident of Village- Simariya Ghat, Lawki Toli, P.S.- Barauni (Chakiya), District- Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Prerna Anand For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr. Gautam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 02-05-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Barauni P.S. Case no. 01 of 2022 instituted for the offence under Sections 394 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner has opened fire as a result of which informant has sustained gun shot injury and thereafter snatched his motorcycle.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. His name has been transpired on the basis of confessional statement of apprehended accused Bipin Kumar, which has no evidentiary value in the eye of law. Petitioner is languishing in Judicial

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2522 of 2023(3) dt.02-05-2023 2/2 custody since 29.01.2022.

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submitted that at the instance of the petitioner, stolen motorcycle has been recovered, which was parked near his house. Petitioner is habitual offender as five criminal cases of Similar nature are pending against him.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of injury and recovery of stolen motorcycle near his house, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial as early as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Sushma/lata/- U T