Rakesh Kumar @ Tuntun Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19557 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-375 Year-2024 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Rakesh Kumar @ Tuntun Kumar, Son of Ashok Saw, Resident of Village - Unta Madarpur, P.S. and District - Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nityanand Neeraj, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Shaheen Begum, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 22-04-2025 Heard Mr. Nityanand Neeraj, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Shaheen Begum, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 375 of 2024 dated 20.05.2024 registered for the offence punishable under section 394 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The main submissions advanced by petitioner's counsel are that as per prosecution story the instant matter relates to loot of a motorcycle from the possession of the informant by three miscreants and the accused persons were riding on a motorcycle at that time but the petitioner has no connection to the alleged occurrence and he has been made accused mainly on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Dilip Yadav. It is further submitted that the looted motorcycle has been recovered but not from the possession of the petitioner rather the same has been recovered in following with the disclosure statement made by co-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19557 of 2025(2) dt.22-04-2025 2/2 accused Dilip Yadav and further, the motorcycle bearing registration No. BR-25 F 6659, of which details has been mentioned in the FIR and the same is said to have been used by the accused while committing the offence of loot, does not belong to the petitioner rather the same belongs to co-accused Dilip Yadav, so, against this petitioner, there is no any kind of incriminating material or admissible evidence. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is a young person having fair and clean antecedent and has been languishing in jail since 06.01.2025 and against him, the investigation has been completed.

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

5. In the facts and circumstances of this case as well as considering the aforesaid submissions and mainly coupled with petitioner's young age and completion of the investigation against him, this Court is inclined to grant the relief of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court concerned in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 375 of 2024. (Shailendra Singh, J) annu/- U T