Md. Raish v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39164 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-275 Year-2023 Thana- MUZFFARPUR GRP CASE DistrictMuzaffarpur ====================================================== MD. RAISH SON OF MD. DULARE @ MOHAMMAD DULAREY RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - MARWAN, P.S. - KARJA, DISTRICT - MUZAFFARPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Alok Kumar Alok For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 29-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Muzaffarpur Rail P.S. Case No. 275 of 2023 lodged on 14.08.2023 under Section 304, 379, 356 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, F.I.R. has been lodged against unknown accused persons against whom there is an allegation that the accused persons has snatched the mobile from the passenger and in order to save his mobile phone, he fell down from the train and died.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel also submits that that the name of the petitioner has been figured in this case only by virtue of information provided by the spy. He submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered from

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39164 of 2024(2) dt.29-05-2024 2/2 his possession neither he was put on T.I.P. Counsel further submits that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean and there is one case pending against him in which he is on bail. The petitioner is in custody since 18.08.2023.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that it is true that name of the petitioner has been figured in this case by the virtue of the statement made by the spy but on the other hand, it is also true that from the confessional statement of the petitioner, name of one accused namely Asmith Raj has been figured and from the statement of the Asmith Raj, the snatched mobile has been recovered from one Mr. Afzal who has also made confession and disclosed the name of all the three accused.

6. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. However, petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) Sunnykr/- U