Rinku Raj @ Rinku Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13540 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-758 Year-2022 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== RINKU RAJ @ RINKU RAI, S/O SHIV SHANKAR PD. RAI @ SHIV SHANKAR PRASAD RAI, R/O VILLAGE- ANJANI MATHIYA, P.S.- PARSA, DISTRICT- SARAN AT CHAPRA ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 12-03-2024
1. Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case no. 758 of 2022, registered under section 379 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that while his tractor and trailer were parked by his house loaded with various articles as stated in the FIR, on waking up in the night he found his vehicle missing along with the goods loaded thereon. Though, some movement could be seen in the CCTV footage, however, the accused could not be identified.
4. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13540 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024 2/3 submits that the FIR was registered against unknown. Referring to the order of the learned trial Court, it is submitted that some of the stolen articles were allegedly recovered from the shop of one Sudhir Kumar Singh who is said to have confessed before the police that he has purchased the stolen cement from the petitioner. No incriminating article has been recovered from the petitioner's possession who has been falsely implicated in the case because of his antecedents. He is in custody since 20.7.2023.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender having several antecedents of similar nature against him.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegation in the FIR, the material that has transpired in course of investigation as is evident from the order of the learned trial Court together with the petitioner having remained in custody for 7 months since 20.7.2023 and charge-sheet having been submitted in the case, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case no. 758 of 2022, on furnishing bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13540 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024 3/3 bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur.
(Partha Sarthy, J) avinash/- U T