Patna High CourtCR. MISC./11728/2016rejected

Brajesh Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2016-04-29Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11728 of 2016 (3) dt.29-04-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.11728 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1 Year- 2016 Thana -BASANTPUR District- SIWAN ======================================================

1. Brajesh Singh, son of Rama Shankar Singh, Resident of VillagePandauli (Parawali) Ujjain Tola, P.S.- Bhasantpur, District- Siwan. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijay Prakash Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kanhaiya Kishore (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 29-04-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Basantpur P.S. Case No. 01 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 413 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegedly, acting on a tip off, the informant and other police personnel apprehended the petitioner and he confessed his guilt that he has kept the stolen truck in the garage of Basant Prasad and thereafter, Basant Prasad was also apprehended and from garage stolen truck was recovered.

Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner has been made victim of police atrocities, nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner, from earlier he is involved in only one case bearing Basantpur P.S. Case No.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11728 of 2016 (3) dt.29-04-2016 60 of 2015 under Section 393 of the Indian Penal Code and coaccused Basant Prasad has already been allowed bail and as such he deserves sympathetic consideration to which the learned APP opposes by submitting that on the basis of confession of the petitioner stolen truck was recovered .

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering that on the basis of confession of the petitioner stolen truck has been recovered and as such, at this stage, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected.

However, the petitioner may renew his prayer of bail after remaining further six months in custody. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T