Patna High CourtCR. MISC./32385/2023bail rejected

Nitish Rai v. The State Of Bihar

2023-06-28Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32385 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2022 Thana- SALIMPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Nitish Rai Son Of Ravindra Kumar Resident Of Village- Hajipur, (Hasratganj), Police Station- Town, District- Vaishali At Hajipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sudama Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajit Kumar, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 28-06-2023 Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within two weeks from today.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

3. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Salimpur P.S. Case No. 124 of 2022 registered on 30.06.2022 lodged under Sections 392 of the I.P.C.

4. As per the prosecution case, F.I.R. has been lodged against four persons, who committed a robbery at a petrol pump on gunpoint and looted Rs. 50,000/-.

5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner nor he was put on T.I.P.

6. Counsel further submits that petitioner is innocent

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32385 of 2023(2) dt.28-06-2023 2/2 and has committed no offence. He further submits that petitioner is in custody since 22.08.2022 having seven criminal cases pending against him, but simultaneously he submits that all the seven cases were filed after figuring petitioner's name in the present case and in the last case, he was remanded. Counsel further submits that petitioner is ready to fulfill all the conditions whatsoever shall be imposed upon him.

7. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that criminal antecedent of the petitioner may be taken into consideration at the time of granting bail to him.

8. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail.

9. With this observation, the bail application stands rejected.

10. Liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail, after framing of charge. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) Ashishsingh/- U T