Sushil Kumar Mishra v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14542 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-553 Year-2022 Thana- SHASTRINAGAR District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

Sushil Kumar Mishra S/O Lalbabu Mishra R/O Village And P.S.- Jaleshwar, District- Mahotari, Nepal 2.

Dinesh Yadav S/O Yogendra Yadav R/V- Ratanpur, P.S.- Mirchaiya, DistrictSirha, Nepal ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kanchan Kumari For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Abhay Kumar Roy ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 20-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 489B, 489C, 420, 417, 120B, 418, 419 of the Indian Penal Code. As per prosecution case, both petitioners belong to Nepal and they were apprehended on the spot, from their possession total Rs. 2,16,800/- (two lakh sixteen thousand eight hundred) fake currencies were recovered.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. They have falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioners have

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14542 of 2023(4) dt.20-07-2023 2/2 no concern with the alleged recovery and they have got no criminal antecedent. It is further submitted that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 02.09.2022. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted on perusal of case diary that both the petitioners are involved in the transaction of fake currency in Indian through open Nepal Border and they are active in International organized crime. Seizure list shows that a huge quantity of fake currencies was recovered from the possession of the petitioners. It is further submitted that several witnesses of the case have also supported the prosecution version.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact and gravity of the nature, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail and, as such, their prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Manishkumar/- U T