Ram Babu Pal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.2307 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -91 Year- 2015 Thana -BETTIAH TOWN DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ====================================================== Ram Babu Pal, son of Vijay Prasad @ Vijay Pal, Resident of village - Sirisiya Biswas, Police Station - Chanpatiya (O.P. Sirisiya Biswas) District - West Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ram Kishun Prasad For the Opposite Party : Mr. Amrendra Pd.(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 11-03-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is an accused in connection with Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 91 of 2015, registered under Section 379, 411 and 413 of Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Champaran.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. in course of investigation, the Police got recorded the confessional statement of the petitioner showing the involvement of this petitioner in the present case about the theft of Bolero vehicle.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner and submits that the Police got recorded the confessional statement of the petitioner as

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2307 of 2016 (3) dt.11-03-2016 2/2 detailed in para 41 of the case diary showing involvement of this petitioner and others about committing theft of Bolero vehicle and on the basis of confessional statement of petitioner the stolen vehicle was recovered near the temple as detailed in paragraph no. 56 of the case diary. The petitioners appears to have criminal antecedent. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner, above named, is rejected.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T