Amarnath Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3953 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-161 Year-2021 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur ====================================================== AMARNATH MAHTO S/o- Milan Mahto Resident of Village - Chiranjeevipur, P.S. - Bachhabara, District - Begusarai (Bihar). ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR BIhar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arun Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-05-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Dalsinghsarai P.S. Case No. 161 of 2021 registered for the offence punishable under Section 395 of the I.PC. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 24.06.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted in the case and has antecedent of four cases and the informant alleges that he was intercepted by three unknown criminals who looted his motorcycle, Rs. 12,500/- along with other articles as detailed in the FIR.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3953 of 2022(2) dt.26-05-2022 2/3 The learned counsel submits that the FIR was against unknown and the petitioner came to be arrested as police during the course of investigation arrested five persons including the petitioner and from their possession the looted motorcycle was recovered, it is next submitted that admittedly five persons were arrested and the looted motorcycle was recovered but it is not clear that from which accused the motorcycle was recovered. Learned counsel thus submits that the petitioner came to be implicated merely because it is alleged that the looted motorcycle was recovered from the accused persons who were apprehended by the police as aforesaid.

The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the bail application.

Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody, charge-sheet has been submitted in the case and despite being in custody he was not put on TIP nor the recovery as alleged is clear whether it was from the petitioner or not, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Dalsighsarai P.S. Case No. 161 of 2021 with a condition

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3953 of 2022(2) dt.26-05-2022 3/3 that one of the bailor of the petitioner shall be his father Milan Mahto.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) shahzad/- U T