Sanjeet Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.54613 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -170 Year- 2016 Thana -LAURIYA DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ====================================================== Sanjeet Sharma, Son of Mathura Sharma, Resident of Kachahari Tola Gora, P.S.- Shanichari, District- West Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Asha Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 23-12-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 08.10.2016 in connection with Lauriya P.S. Case No. 170 of 2016 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case is that while the informant who is a sales man was returning home on his cousin's motorcycle two persons overtook him and on another motorcycle three other persons also came there and snatched his motorcycle and bag containing cheque book, passbook and Rs. 35,000/- cash. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent and has no criminal history and has

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54613 of 2016 (2) dt.23-12-2016 2/2 falsely been implicated on the confessional statement of the other co-accused Bablue Kumar Dubey and Anil Kumar Kushwaha which has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. It has further been submitted that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and no T.I. Parade has been done so far. He submits that he is a businessman doing business and the transactions in the bank account is his own savings and is not stolen money.

However, learned A.P.P. for the State submits that during investigation the name of the petitioner surfaced and hence, opposes the prayer for bail.

Be that as it may, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and that the petitioner has no criminal history, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 1st Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Lauriya P.S. Case No. 170 of 2016. (Nilu Agrawal, J) Prakash/- U T