Rakesh Kumar @ Pintu @ Fauji v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13926 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-358 Year-2020 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad ====================================================== RAKESH KUMAR @ PINTU @ FAUJI Son of Ram Uchit Mahto Resident of Village - Shivnar, P.S.- Mokama, District - Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Prashant Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jagdhar Pd., APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 01-07-2021 This matter is taken up for consideration through Video Conferencing under the orders of Hon'ble the Chief Justice.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Jehanabad Town P.S. Case No. 358 of 2020, registered for the offence punishable under Section 398 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

As per the prosecution case, while the informant was going to his home after closing his shop and reached near Rajyakrit Urdu Madhya Vidyalaya at Malahchak More, this petitioner along with two other unknown stopped his vehicle and demanded his bag, tried to commit loot on the point of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13926 of 2021(2) dt.01-07-2021 2/2 pistol and one of them fired upon the place of occurrence. In the meantime, police party came there and after seeing them, all the accused persons tried to flee away, but this petitioner has been arrested on the spot.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that no looted article has been recovered from possession of this petitioner. Petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he is in custody since 02.07.2020.

Learned APP however, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that petitioner was arrested on the spot while committing loot.

Considering the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation and the fact that petitioner was arrested on the spot while committing loot, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T