Suresh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13695 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-572 Year-2019 Thana- BRAHMPUR District- Buxar ====================================================== Suresh Yadav, son of Late Ghutan Yadav alias Butan Yadav, resident of village Rampur Mathia, P.S. Simari, District Buxar. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vijay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 22-06-2020 This case has been heard through video-conferencing. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. When the informant gone to vegetable market of Dharhara and was engaged in purchasing of the vegetable after parking his Passion Pro motorcycle and when he returned to the parking place he did not found his motorcycle. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. The petitioner is neither named in the F.I.R. nor he was apprehended on the spot. No incriminating article has been recovered from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13695 of 2020(4) dt.22-06-2020 2/2 his conscious physical possession. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner has been languishing in custody since 24.12.2019.
Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the petitioner is a habitual criminal and four criminal cases are pending against him. Hence, he does not deserve bail.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for bail is hereby rejected. However, the petitioner is granted liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T