Ranjan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.36542 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -30 Year- 2017 Thana -MAHESI DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Ranjan Yadav Son of Radhey Shyam Yadav, R/o Village- Jurabganj (Zorabganj), P.S.- Korha, District- Katihar, at present R/o VillageGarabari, P.S.- Korha, District- Katihar. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Parmanand Pd. Nr. Sahi, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 19-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner is languishing in custody since 24.02.2017 in connection with Mehsi P.S. Case No. 30 of 2017 registered for offence punishable under Sections 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case, as lodged by the police personnel, is that on information that two persons have been caught by the local people while snatching Rs. 24,000/- from a lady, namely, Prabhawati Devi, who after withdrawing the said money from the bank, was going to market, the police apprehended the petitioner and one another and found that they had no paper regarding the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36542 of 2017 (2) dt.19-08-2017 2/3 motorcycle, which they were driving.

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. In fact, for the same occurrence on the same day, Mehsi P.S. Case No. 29 of 2017 had been lodged against the petitioner, although under different sections of the Indian Penal Code and apart from that, petitioner has no other criminal history and that no money has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner had purchased the said vehicle and did not know that it was stolen one. He submits that charge-sheet has already been submitted and there is no allegation of tampering with the prosecution witnesses by the petitioner.

However, learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances and the materials on record, let petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36542 of 2017 (2) dt.19-08-2017 3/3 Magistrate-VI, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Mehsi P.S. Case No. 30 of 2017.

(Nilu Agrawal, J.) Arjun/- U T