Rajeev Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19411 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-36 Year-2023 Thana- SHEKHPURA District- Sheikhpura ====================================================== Rajeev Kumar Son Of Shri Suresh Prasad Singh, R/O Village- Pain, P.S.- Shekhpura, District- Shekhpura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhirendra Nath Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar No.2, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 05-06-2023 Let the defect, if any, be removed within two weeks from today.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sheikhpura P.S. Case No. 36 of 2023 dated 24.01.2023 lodged under Section 392 of the I.P.C.

As per the prosecution, F.I.R. has been lodged against four unknown persons alleging that the informant when coming to deposit money amounting Rs.12,50,000/- in the bank then in the meantime, four accused persons from motorcycle came and looted the said amount from the informant.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He further

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19411 of 2023(2) dt.05-06-2023 2/3 submits that the antecedent of the petitioner is clean and he is in custody since 13.02.2023. He further submits that from the order of the Sessions Court it transpires that some looted money has been recovered from the house of the accused person. He further submits that this contention is not correct as the said money which has alleged to be recovered from his house is the personal money of the accused.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is involved in the commission of the crime as it has come in the case diary that weapon has been provided by the present petitioner to the accused persons. Counsel also submits that his name has figured by virtue of confessional statement of the co-accused. Upon specific query from the counsel for the petitioner that whether charge has been framed in this case or not, counsel fairly submits that charge has not been framed in this case.

In the present facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at present but liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge and trial Court is directed to release him on bail imposing its own conditions so that he may not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19411 of 2023(2) dt.05-06-2023 3/3 evade his appearance during trial.

With this observation, the bail application stands rejected.

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