← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./29002/2024dismissed

Pankaj Yadav @ Pukla Yadav @ Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2026-04-02Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29002 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-76 Year-2023 Thana- SHAHKUND District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Pankaj Yadav @ Pukla Yadav @ Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar Yadav S/O Tunnee Yadav R/O Village- Jankipur, P.S- Amarpur, Distt.- Banka. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vishwa Ranjan Choudhary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 02-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Shahkund (Sajour) P.S. Case No. 76/2023 registered for the offences punishable under Section 392 of I.P.C.

3. As per the prosecution case, unknown criminals on pistol point looted two mobile phones, ATM cards and Rs. 17,500/- from the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case. It is next submitted that the name of the petitioner has come in the selfinculpatory statement of co-accused Ankit Kumar and Chandan Yadav and on the statement of Ankit Kumar one looted motorcycle was recovered. Ankit Kumar was also identified in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29002 of 2024(6) dt.02-04-2026 2/2 the T.I. parade. Learned counsel further submits that he has nine criminal antecedents and he is in custody since 09.06.2023. The petitioner undertakes to co-operate in the case/ trial.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the allegations levelled against the petitioner and the criminal antecedent, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed with direction to the concerned court below to expedite the trial. (Sandeep Kumar, J) tusharika/- U T