Sonu Kumar @ Sonu @ Kapil v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18892 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-663 Year-2021 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Sonu Kumar @ Sonu @ Kapil Son of Satya Narayan Singh @ Narayan Singh Resident of Village - Naurangabad, Jitan Chowk, P.S.- Hajipur Sadar, District - Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjit Kumar Thakur, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, A.P.P ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER 18-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Let the defect (s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation is of snatching of motorcycle, 1,27,000/- cash, one tab, bio metric device from the informant on the point of pistol by two miscreants.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. He further submits that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18892 of 2022(2) dt.18-08-2022 2/2 Further, it is submitted that the petitioner's name transpired in this case only on the basis of confessional statement of other coaccused, namely, Saket Kumar. No incriminating articles have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Till date, no Test Identification Parade (T.I.P) has been made yet. The petitioner is in custody since 01.10.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted in the case and has antecedent of two cases. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender and he has got two criminal antecedent. He also submits that during the course of the investigation, material evidence has come that he has played an active role in the alleged occurrence. Further, smart card related with looted materials has been recovered from the pocket of the petitioner.

Considering the facts and circumstances as well as the criminal antecedent, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is hereby rejected.

(Khatim Reza, J) Gaurav Kumar/- U T