Pankaj Kumar Mallik v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14253 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-134 Year-2021 Thana- BALIGAON District- Vaishali ====================================================== Pankaj Kumar Mallik S/o Late Surehi Mallik @ Late Lulhai Mallik Resident of Village - Bela Sandhan , P.S.- Baligaon, District - Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bhaskar Shankar, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-07-2022 The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within one month.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Baligaon P.S. case no. 134 of 2021 registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. The substance of the main allegation is that the informant, who runs a jewellery shop, was coming with his son after having closed his shop and on the way three unknown persons riding on a motorcycle stopped the informant and thereafter looted a bag and mobile phone from the possession of informant's son and the said bag contained the ornaments of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14253 of 2022(2) dt.11-07-2022 2/2 informant's shop.

The main submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner are that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent, the FIR was lodged against unknown persons, during the custody petitioner was not put on TIP and he has been languishing in jail since 24.12.2021.

Learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail.

Heard both the sides and perused the FIR. It appears from the seizure list that from the house of petitioner a motorcycle used in the commission of alleged crime and some ornaments which were looted by the accused persons, were recovered and the said recovery of looted articles goes against the petitioner and showing his involvement in the alleged crime, in the opinion of this Court it is not a fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly his prayer for bail stands rejected. (Shailendra Singh, J) siddharthkr/- U T