Patna High CourtCR. MISC./2804/2020dismissed

Indra Bhushan Yadav @ Indal Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2020-06-05Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2804 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-457 Year-2019 Thana- KRITYANAND NAGAR DistrictPurnia ====================================================== INDRA BHUSHAN YADAV @ INDAL YADAV Son of Brahmdev Yadav Resident of Village - Charaiya, Rahika, P.S.- Srinagar, Dist.- Purnia. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kundan Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-06-2020 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This application for regular bail arises out of K.Nagar P.S. Case No. 457 of 2019 disclosing offences punishable under Sections 392 and 365 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that except for confessional statement of coaccused Md. Alam and that of the petitioner, there is no material against the petitioner collected in course of investigation. He has submitted that though the petitioner is in custody since 14.11.2019, he has not been put on Test Identification Parade. I have perused the case diary from which it transpires that co-accused Md. Alam in his confessional statement before the police disclosed in vivid detail the manner in which the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2804 of 2020(3) dt.05-06-2020 2/2 crime was committed and the looted articles were recovered. His statement discloses petitioner's active participation in commission of the offence. Further his confessional statement has led to recovery of the looted articles from possession of other co-accused Suraj Kumar. The petitioner in his statement before the police has corroborated the statement of co-accused Md. Alam.

Considering the seriousness of the offence, I am not inclined to grant him the privilege of regular bail for the present. This application is rejected.

The petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after six months, if there is no progress in the trial. arun/- (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) U