Prakash Kushwaha @ Prakash Kumar @ Pappu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.12131 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -6 Year- 2016 Thana -DHANGAI District- BHOJPUR ======================================================

1. Prakash Kushwaha @ Prakash Kumar @ Pappu Son of late Nandkishan Kushwaha village - Masahtola Trimurti Deoghar Julmi Tola, P.S. Jagdishpur, Distt. Bhojpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Yadav For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anish Chandra(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 04-05-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offences punishable under sections 394 and 411of the I.P.C Allegedly, four persons after assaulting the informant snatched Rs. 10,000/- from him and started fleeing away, however, after chase the petitioner was apprehended and he disclosed the names of his associates and from possession of the petitioner two notes of Rs.500/- denomination i.e. Rs. 1000/- which are the part of the looted amount was recovered. Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner has been made victim of the circumstances, he has got

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.12131 of 2016 (3) dt.04-05-2016 2/2 no criminal antecedent, the petitioner has withdrawn the amount of Rs.1000/- from his account on the same day and the recovered amount was of the petitioner, the petitioner is under treatment as earlier he has met with an accident and without any legal and tangible material he is suffering in custody. The learned A.P.P. opposes prayer for bail by submitting that the petitioner was apprehended after chase and the informant has identified him as well as two notes recovered from his possession and further the petitioner has confessed his guilt also.

In the facts and circumstances as stated above, at present I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and accordingly his such prayer stands rejected in connection with Dhangai P.S. Case No. 06 of 2016 pending in the court of Sri S.K. Srivastava, J.M. 1st Class, Bhojpur, Ara.

However, considering detention of the petitioner, let the trial be expedited and concluded preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, failing which the petitioner, if at no fault, may renew his prayer for bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T