Md. Arasad @ Arasad D @ Saddab @ Md. Arshad @ Arshad D @ Sadab @ Md. Shadab v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10289 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-482 Year-2024 Thana- RUPASPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Md. Arasad @ Arasad D @ Saddab @ Md. Arshad @ Arshad D @ Sadab @ Md. Shadab S/O Md. Akil R/O Nausa Pani Tanki Ke pas, P.S- Phulwari Sharif, District- Patna at present-Nayatola, P.S- Phulwari Sharif, DistrictPatna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhirendra Prasad Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Murli Dhar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 27-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Rupaspur P.S. Case No. 482 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 304(2), 112(2), 317(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. Prosecution case, in short, is that, while the informant and his wife were on a motorcycle near Loristan Valley School when two bike riders snatched his wife's chain and fled. In the meantime, the informant raised an alarm and with the crowd's help, caught one accused person, i.e. this petitioner and also recovered the chain.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10289 of 2025(2) dt.27-02-2025 2/2 present case. Learned counsel further submitted that, as a matter of fact, due to over taking of vehicle, some altercation took place between the informant and the petitioner and, in revenge, the informant engineered a false story. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 31.07.2024 and has fifteen criminal antecedents.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Let the petitioner be released on bail, after framing of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Rupaspur P.S. Case No. 482 of 2024. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T