Manish Kumar Sinha @ Manish Kumar @ Doctor v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 52271 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -31 Year- 2014 Thana -KHODAWANDPUR District- BEGUSARAI ====================================================== Manish Kumar Sinha @ Manish Kumar @ Doctor Son of Bipin Bihari Prasad, Resident of Village- Sonma, P.S.- Bakhri Bazar, DistrictBegusarai. .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Naresh Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 2.
03-12-2015 Heard Sri Ram Naresh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Madan Kumar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. The petitioner, who is in custody in Khodawandpur P.S. Case No. 31 of 2014 registered for the offence under Sections 395, 397 & 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, has prayed for grant of bail.
It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that F.I.R. was lodged against unknown and the petitioner in the present case has been remanded from another case. He further submits that save and except, disclosure of name by one of coaccused as well as confession of the petitioner, there is nothing on record to connect the petitioner with the present case. He further submits that one of the co-accused has been granted bail by this
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.52271 of 2015 (2) dt.03-12-2015 2/2 Court.
Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer of bail. He submits that the petitioner is having criminal antecedents and he was involved in other serious cases also. He further submits that during investigation, his mobile phone was recovered and CDR establishes his presence at the place of occurrence.
In the present case, about Rs. 50,000,00/- (Rupees fifty lacs) cash was looted, while the said cash box was being shifted from one bank to another bank. In the said occurrence, the accused persons had also opened fire on the bank guard. Be that as it may, keeping in view the antecedents of the petitioner as well as indication regarding presence of the petitioner at the place of occurrence on the confession of coaccused, I do not consider the present case fit to be granted bail. Accordingly, the bail petition stands dismissed. (Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay U T