Chandan Pandey v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17818 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2022 Thana- ARER District- Madhubani ====================================================== Chandan Pandey, Son of Birbal Pandey, Village- Bela Durga Mandir Sundarpur Naya Gharari, PS- University, Dist- Darbhanga. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Ms. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate Mr. Purushottam Kumar, Advocate Mr. Pravin Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Rina Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 15-05-2023
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Arer P.S. Case no.117 of 2022 registered under sections 394 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, while the two accused persons snatched a bag containing Rs.20,000/- from the possession of the informant and made an attempt to escape on a motorcycle, it is stated that as a result of them being pushed by the husband of the informant they fell down and were caught along with the stolen articles. They were also assaulted.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17818 of 2023(2) dt.15-05-2023 2/2 manner of occurrence is other than what has been narrated in the F.I.R. It was just a minor dispute relating to an accident which took place and the petitioner has been implicated in a false case. The petitioner is in custody since 30.8.2022 and investigation in the case has concluded.
5. Heard learned A.P.P. for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegation against the petitioner in the FIR, wherein it is stated that the petitioner was caught red handed at the place of occurrence while making an attempt to escape after snatching a bag containing Rs.20,000/- from the possession of the informant, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.
7. In view of the facts of the case, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after six months. (Partha Sarthy, J) avinash/- U T