Patna High CourtCR. MISC./21021/2024dismissed

Yuvraj @ Yuvraj Kumar @ Fulchand Kumar @ Fulchand v. The State Of Bihar

2024-03-13Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21021 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-80 Year-2023 Thana- NOORSARAI District- Nalanda ====================================================== Yuvraj @ Yuvraj Kumar @ Fulchand Kumar @ Fulchand S/O- Kamlesh Kumar @ Kamlesh Kumar Singh R/O- Village- Srinagar, P.S.- Tharthari, Dist.- Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Umesh Lal Verma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 13-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. This is the second attempt for bail of the petitioner as earlier such prayer was rejected by order dated 17.10.2023 in Cr. Misc. No. 67129 of 2023.

3. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S. Tr. No. 698 of 2023 arising out of Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 80 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The following order was passed on 17.10.2023 in Cr. Misc. No. 67129 of 2023 which reads as under: "Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 80 of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21021 of 2024(2) dt.13-03-2024 2/2 2023 registered for the offence under Sections 394 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is accused of committing dacoity.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 29.04.2023 and has 8 criminal antecedents.

5. Learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the prayer of bail of the petitioner is rejected herewith."

5. This Court finds no new ground to review its earlier order dated 17.10.2023.

6. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed. (Sandeep Kumar, J) P. Kumar U T