Satyajeet Kumar @ Chunchun Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.32679 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -9 Year- 2015 Thana -TEGHRA District- BEGUSARAI ======================================================

1. Satyajeet Kumar @ Chunchun Singh Son of Sri Parmanand Singh, Resident of Village - Bihat Tola, Khem Karanpur, Police Station - Barauni in the district of Begusarai.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhu Narayan Sharma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kr.Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 09-11-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P.

The petitioner seeks bail in Teghra P.S. Case No. 09 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate , Bagusarai. Allegedly when the informant was going by his motorcycle Hero Honda black color bearing No. BR-09K/6118 from Bhagwanpur to Begusarai on 07.01.2015 at 7.45 P.M. and as soon as reached Pathkaul Chowk three motorcycle borne criminals stopped his vehicle and at the point opf pistol snatched his motorcycle and mobile , purse cash of Rs. 500/-, A.T.M. card and thereafter miscreants fled away towards N.H.- 28. During

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32679 of 2015 (3) dt.09-11-2015 2/2 investigation on the basis of call detailed report Ankit Kumar was caught with snatched mobile of the informant , who stated the name of the petitioner that from him he has purchased the same and thereafter the house of the petitioner was raided and the petitioner was caught with snatched motorcycle of the informant and further the petitioner confessed his guilt. Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner has not been put on T.I.P. The motorcycle recovered has also not been put on T.I.P. and the petitioner is suffering in custody without any tangible material since 9.05.2015. The petitioner has been kept confined in police lock up for two days and as such he deserves sympathetic consideration. The learned A.P.P.

Opposes the prayer of bail by submitting that from the possession of the petitioner robbed motorcycle was recovered and he has confessed his guilt also. In the facts and circumstances stated above and considering the alleged recovery, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) M.Rahman/- U T