Lucky @ Gyan Ranjan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22575 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2020 Thana- HAJIPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Lucky @ Gyan Ranjan (Male) aged about 23 years, son of Ved Prakash, Resident of Village - Sanchi Patti, Shakti Nagar, P.s.- Hajipur Town, Dist.- Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 12-10-2020 The matter has been heard via video conferencing due to circumstances prevailing on account of the COVID-19 pandemic.
2. Heard Mr. Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.
3. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Hajipur Town PS Case No. 38 of 2020 dated 13.01.2020 instituted under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with others had looted cash of Rs. 13,90,000/- from the office of the informant after assaulting the employees.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is not named in the F.I.R. and has been made accused only due to confessional statement of co-accused. It was submitted that no Test
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22575 of 2020 dt.12-10-2020 2/2 Identification Parade (TIP) has been held and also that no recovery has been made from him and is in custody since 12.04.2020.
6. Learned APP submitted that the petitioner has criminal antecedent being accused in three other cases of similar nature. Learned counsel submitted that as per the allegation itself, one of the miscreants was wearing helmet and three others had mask on their face, and, thus, there cannot be any occasion for conducting TIP. It was further submitted that as there is no enmity between the co-accused and the petitioner, there is no chance of false implication. Further, it was submitted that the police during investigation have to rely on various sources to get to the real culprits and the information given by a co-accused cannot be thrown away, at least for the present.
7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
8. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Rakhi/- AFR/NAFR U T