Raju Basfore @ Raja Basfor v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23668 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-882 Year-2023 Thana- CHAPRA TOWN District- Saran ====================================================== Raju Basfore @ Raja Basfor S/O Subash Basfore R/O Village- Sarkari Bazar Domgali, P.S- Chapra Town, Distt.-saran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjeet Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 04-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 882 of 2023, lodged on 02.12.2023 under Sections 457, 380, 436, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the FIR has been lodged against two named accused persons including the present petitioner against whom there is an allegation that they have committed theft at the house on the informant and subsequently, identified from the C.C.T.V. footage.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel also submits that the date of occurrence is 12.11.2023 and the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23668 of 2024(2) dt.04-04-2024 2/3 FIR has been lodged on 02.12.2023 and the delay has not been explained. Counsel further submits that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is clean and he is in custody since 04.12.2023.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that counsel for the petitioner has made wrong submissions as in the FIR, the date of occurrence is 01.12.2023 and the FIR has been lodged on 02.12.2023. Counsel further submits that in the rejection order, it is clear cut mentioned that the petitioner has been identified on the basis of C.C.T.V. footage and on his confessional statement, stolen articles were recovered.

6. Upon specific query of the Court from the counsel for petitioner that whether charge has been framed in this case or not, counsel submits that he is not aware that whether charge has been framed or not.

7. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner at present.

8. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 882 of 2023, pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran at Chapra is hereby rejected.

9. Liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23668 of 2024(2) dt.04-04-2024 3/3 may renew his prayer for bail six months after framing of charge.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Divyansh/- U T