← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./18162/2022dismissed

Kunal Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2022-07-27Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18162 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-104 Year-2021 Thana- ATHMALGOLA District- Patna ====================================================== Kunal Kumar, Son of Yogendra Rai, Resident of village-Naya Tola, Raghopur, P.S.- Bakhtiyarpur, District - Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Kashyap, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nirmala Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 27-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Let the defect(s) be removed within four weeks of the complete start of the physical Court in normal course. The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with S. Tr. No.738 of 2021 arising out of Athmalgola P.S. Case No.104/2021 instituted under Sections 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation in the FIR is that the informant is the Manager of the Bandhan Bank. He has alleged in the FIR that the employee of the Bank namely Srikant Kumar was out for the collection of the money and at 11:00 O'clock he informed the Manager that his money has been snatched by the accused persons along with the Tab, Register, Calculator etc. At very that time the police party reached the place of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18162 of 2022(2) dt.27-07-2022 2/2 occurrence and was able to apprehend one of the accused persons namely Kunal Kumar, the petitioner herein. The amount looted were recovered/seized from him as also the motorcycle. Accordingly, charges under 395 has been framed against him. Considering the nature of allegation as also the fact that he has criminal antecedent, this Court is not inclined to grant him privilege of bail which is accordingly rejected. The Trial court is directed to expedite the Trial and conclude the same within a period of nine months, failing which report be submitted on the reason for the delay. (Rajiv Roy, J) Prakash Narayan /- U T