Patna High CourtCR. MISC./34376/2024bail rejected

Mahesh Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

2024-09-25Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34376 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-540 Year-2022 Thana- FATUA District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

Mahesh Thakur SON OF LUCHU THAKUR VILLAGE- BANKIPUR GORAKH, P.S.- FATUHA,DIST- PATNA 2.

DINESH KUMAR SON OF MAHESH THAKUR VILLAGE- BANKIPUR GORAKH, P.S.- FATUHA,DIST- PATNA 3.

PANKAJ KUMAR SON OF MAHESH THAKUR VILLAGE- BANKIPUR GORAKH, P.S.- FATUHA,DIST- PATNA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Surendra Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Murli Dhar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 25-09-2024

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Fatuha Police Station Case No. 540 of 2022, dated 30.07.2022, disclosing offences punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that some unknown thieves entered into the house of the informant and on gun-point, they looted away cash amount of Rs. 6-7 lakhs and jewellery worth Rs. 15 lakhs. The First Information Report is against unknown.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34376 of 2024(3) dt.25-09-2024 2/2

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case by the police. He further submits that the name of the petitioners transpired in this case on the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused Suraj Kumar, who was arrested in connection with some other case. He further submits that some utensils were recovered from the house of the petitioners, which belongs to the petitioners themselves.

5. Regards being had to the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the confessional statement of the co-accused Suraj Kumar, recorded in paragraph 15 of the case diary, leading to recovery of utensils from the house of the petitioners and the seizure list, I am not inclined to grant the petitioners privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √