Rahul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28612 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-329 Year-2019 Thana- BHAGWANPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Rahul Kumar, aged about 20 yrs, Male, son of Vijay Ray, resident of villageSadapur Dasrath Chok, P.S.- Mahua, District- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mrs. Bela Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 11-01-2021 Heard Mrs. Bela Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No. 329 of 2019, Gr. No. 6839 of 2019 registered for the offence under Section 392 of the I.P.C. The allegation as per the First Information Report is that three unknown persons entered into the Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank, Prataptand Branch and looted a sum of Rs. 1,78,176/- on gun point.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the First Information Report and has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel further submits that the name of the petitioner has transpired on the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28612 of 2020(3) dt.11-01-2021 2/2 basis of confessional statement of the co-accused and no incriminating material and / or looted property has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel also submits that petitioner has not been put on T.I. Parade as yet. Learned counsel next submits that petitioner is in custody since 14.02.2020.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State referring to the case diary submits that the petitioner has got criminal antecedent and as such he does not deserve the privilege of regular bail at this stage.

Having regard to the submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration the materials available on record, the fact that petitioner has got criminal antecedent, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of regular bail to the petitioner at this stage.

Accordingly, the petition stands rejected.

However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for regular bail after three months from today.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) praful/- U T