Patna High CourtCR. MISC./7259/2024bail rejected

Anirudh Ram @ Chhotu Ram v. The State Of Bihar

2024-02-17Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7259 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-315 Year-2023 Thana- RAJPUR District- Buxar ====================================================== Anirudh Ram @ Chhotu Ram S/O- Nandlal Ram @ Nand Lal Kumar R/OVillage- Naya Bhojpur, P.S.- Dumraon, Dist.-BUXAR ... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

The State Of Bihar, Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 17-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Rajpur P.S. Case No. 315 of 2023 lodged under Section 392 of the I.P.C.

3. As per the prosecution case, the F.I.R. has been lodged against unknown accused persons against whom there is allegation of snatching of Rs.65,000/- cash from the pocket of the informant on gun point.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and he was not put on T.I.P..

5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7259 of 2024(2) dt.17-02-2024 2/2 in custody since 19.09.2023 and there are five criminal cases pending against him in which he is on bail in two cases and in rest cases, he is persuading for bail.

6. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the case has been filed under Section 392 of I.P.C., but subsequently after investigation, chargesheet has been filed under section 392 and 412 of the I.P.C. which is sessions triable in nature.

7. Counsel also submits that in the rejection order, it has come that the petitioner has been identified as T.I.P. by the informant

8. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U T