Mukesh Yadav @ Makeshwar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25873 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2020 Thana- KIUL RAIL P.S. District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== MUKESH YADAV @ MAKESHWAR Son of Shital Yadav Resident of Village- Mohanpur, P.S.- Kashichak, District- Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Md. Irshad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.B.N.Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 24-11-2020 Heard both sides through Video Conferencing.

The petitioner seeks bail in G.R.P. Kiul (Sheikhpura) Rail P.S. Case No.4 of 2020 registered under Sections 379, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant alleged that he and his wife boarded the train at about 8.00 in the night at Tilaiya Railway Station. When the train reached near Kashichak Railway Station, one person came and snatched one lady's hand bag and tried to jump from the train. The informant caught him but the snatcher of the bag pushed the informant from the train and fled away. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The name of the petitioner surfaced in the case during the course of investigation. The petitioner was apprehended on 10.01.2020 and since then he is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25873 of 2020(3) dt.24-11-2020 2/2 in custody. The snatched article was recovered from under the railway bridge situated near the house of the petitioner but nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. It is further submitted that petitioner is in jail for last ten months but it appears that it was petitioner who confessed his guilt and disclosed that snatched bag was thrown under the bridge situated near the house of the petitioner and on search, a bag was recovered. The petitioner has got criminal antecedent. The petitioner not only snatched the bag from the possession of the wife of the informant but the petitioner also pushed the informant down from the train causing injuries to the informant.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

The petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after six months.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Saurabh/- U T