The State Of Bihar v. Lalit Sharma

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39400 of 2018 (2) dt.19-09-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.39400 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -187 Year- 2016 Thana -LALIT NARAYAN UNIVERSITY DistrictDARBHANGA ======================================================

1. The State Of Bihar .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Lalit Sharma S/o late Bisheshwar Thakur, R/o Vill.- Bibi Pakar, P.S.- Laheriasarai, District- Darbhanga.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhimanyu Sharma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 19-09-2018 Heard Mr. Abhimanyu Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner-State who filed this petition for cancellation of bail of the O.P., Lalit Sharma granted by this Court vide order dated 02.03.2017 in Cr. Misc. No.24 of 2017.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after opposite party being enlarged on bail vide order dated 02.03.2017, he committed crime and for that, Laheriasarai P.S. Case No.201 of 2017 is registered against the O.P. under Sections 419, 420, 186, 188, 353, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the I.P.C. and the O.P. also gave threat to the informant and the petitioner has stated this fact in the petition.

It appears from perusal of the order dated 02.03.2017

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39400 of 2018 (2) dt.19-09-2018 passed in Cr. Misc. No.24 of 2017 by which the O.P. was granted bail in connection with L.N.MU.(University) P.S. Case No.187 of 2016 that the sole O.P. was not named in the F.I.R. The name of the O.P. transpired during the course of investigation on the basis of confessional statement of Md. Wasihat. Md. Wasihat himself confessed before the police that the O.P. had given arms by which he committed robbery and killed the brother of the informant but Md. Wasihat did not disclose any role played by the O.P. in the crime. Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid that no role is alleged to have been committed by the O.P. in dacoity and the murder of the brother of the informant, O.P. was granted bail. I find no reason to cancel the bail granted to the opposite party. Accordingly, this petition for cancellation of bail is devoid of any merit and accordingly, it is dismissed. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Saurabh/- U T