Patna High CourtCR. MISC./36893/2020dismissed

Vishal Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2021-03-16Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36893 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2020 Thana- SHEKHPURA DistrictSheikhpura ====================================================== Vishal Kumar Son Of Late Kshemo Yadav Resident Of Village - Jurabganj, P.S. - Kodha, District - Katihar ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Bachan Jee Ojha, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 16-03-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an undertaking to remove all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter as and when required. It is accordingly directed that all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter be removed within one month hereof.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 25.01.2020 in connection with Shekhpura P.S. Case No. 34 of 2020 for the offences alleged under Sections 401, 414, 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in connection with alleged recovery of stolen motorcycle on which the petitioner was found sitting while coaccused Prabhash Yadav fled away. It is submitted that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36893 of 2020(4) dt.16-03-2021 2/2 petitioner has already suffered more than one year in custody since 25.01.2020, and claims clean antecedents.

4. A supplementary affidavit has been filed stating that after the present case the petitioner has been made accused in three other cases.

5. Learned APP appears and has been heard.

6. Having regard to the nature of accusations and the gravity of the offences alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner. The bail petition stands dismissed with liberty to renew the prayer for bail after framing of charge.

7. Office shall follow-up to ensure that all defects are removed and compliance with the notices of this Court are made by the petitioner within the stipulated time provided in para-1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar//- U T