Sanjeet Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12600 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-135 Year-2023 Thana- CHAKIA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Sanjeet Chaudhary S/o Prabhu Chaudhary @ Prbhu Chaudhri Resident of village- Hindu Chakia, P.S.- Chakia, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The Branch Manager, ICICI Bank Chakiya, P.S. - Chakia, Distt.- East Champaran Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dinesh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 21-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Informant Bank and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 395, 397, 341, 323, 307 and 120(B)/34 of the IPC.

3. As per allegation in the FIR, five unknown persons committed dacoity in the ICICI Bank and looted Rs.48,03,760/- from the bank and it is also alleged that they have snatched cash of the one of the customer of Rs.30,000/- and gold chain from the bank.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He next

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12600 of 2025(2) dt.21-02-2025 2/3 submits that petitioner is in custody since 16.01.2024 and petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name surfaced on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjit Kushwaha @ Ranjit Triwedi and there is no evidentiary value in the eye of law to connect the alleged crime. Petitioner has got fifteen criminal antecedents as stated in para-3 of the petition. Some of the criminal antecedents are in the same nature of the offence and out of which in fifteen cases, the petitioners have been granted bail in fourteen cases. He next submits that co-accused Lucky @ Taukir @ Md. Taukir Alam has already been rejected anticipatory bail by this Court passed in Cr. Misc. No. 356 of 2025.

5. Learned APP for the State as well as Informant Bank opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner has got fifteen criminal antecedents as stated in para-3 of the petition. Some of the criminal antecedents are in the same nature of the offence and the learned APP also submits that out of total fifteen cases, the petitioners have been granted bail in fourteen cases. He next submits that co-accused Lucky @ Taukir @ Md. Taukir Alam has already been rejected anticipatory bail by this Court passed in Cr. Misc. No. 356 of 2025.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12600 of 2025(2) dt.21-02-2025 3/3

6. On perusal of the first information report and impugned order dated 09.07.2024, it appears that in para-50 of the case diary, the confessional statement of the co-accused Ranjit Kumar is involvement of the present petitioner in commission of loot of ICICI Bank and police recovered looted Tab of ICICI Bank and a seizure list was prepared in this regard which is mentioned in para-58 of the case diary. Moreover, police has recovered cash of Rs.2,00,000/- from the house of coaccused Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjit Kushwaha @ Triwedi and petitioner has got fifteen criminal antecedents as stated in para-3 of the petition, so I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

8. The trial Court is directed to conclude the proceeding and frame the charge of this petitioner as early as possible.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T