Sita Ram Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26494 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2024 Thana- DARBHANGA RAIL P.S. DistrictSamastipur ====================================================== Sita Ram Sahni, aged about 24 years, Male, Son of Rajgir Sahni, Resident of Village- Sara Mohanpur Ward No-6, P.S.- Sadar District- Darbhanga. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Surya Narayan Roy, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 16-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with G.R.P./DBG P.S. Case No. 03 of 2024 instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 379 and 356 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, some unknown thief has committed theft of bag from running train containing gold Jhumka Bali, Mobile, cash of Rs. 56,000/- and other documents.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence and has falsely been implicated in this case. The FIR is against

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26494 of 2024(2) dt.16-04-2024 2/3 unknown. Petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name surfaced during the course of investigation. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Petitioner is in custody since 21.01.2024

5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail and submits that from the Veranda of the accused-petitioner stolen mobile has been recovered, so he does not deserve bail.

6. From perusal of the FIR and the impugned order dated 29.02.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Samastipur, it appears that the stolen mobile has been recovered from Veranda of petitioner. He further submits that the Veranda is joint property and recovery was not made from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He next submits that no Test Identification Parade has been conducted till date.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as there is recovery of stolen mobile from the veranda of the house of the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8. Prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

9. Learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within a period of four months from the date of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26494 of 2024(2) dt.16-04-2024 3/3 receipt of a copy of this order and if the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period then the petitioner shall renew his prayer for bail before the trial Court and the trial Court shall grant bail to the petitioner.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Anand Kr.

U T