Patna High CourtCR. MISC./27628/2025rejected

Shekhar Suman @ Chhotu v. The State Of Bihar

2025-05-07Mr. Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27628 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-344 Year-2024 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur ====================================================== Shekhar Suman @ Chhotu ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 07-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Dalasingsarai P.S Case No. 344 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4), 305 of BNS.

3. As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner has committed dacoity in the informant's house.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He next submits that there is no eye witness to this case and there is no cogent and reliable evidence against the petitioner. It is also submitted that petitioner is in judicial custody since 09.12.2024 having one criminal antecedent.

5. However, learned APP for the State oppose the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27628 of 2025(2) dt.07-05-2025 2/2 prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

6. On perusal of the FIR, impugned order dated 10.03.2025 and entire case diary, it appears that after search of the petitioner's house, three jewellery box were recovered, one live cartridge and one i-phone 16 Pro and on being asked he confessed his involvement in this case. From para 61 of the casediary is whatsapp chat report which reveals that fact that message has been exchanged with respect to transaction of case and photo of jewelry etc. So, considering all aspects of the matter and submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Sunnykr/- U