Jitendra Patel v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36897 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-131 Year-2020 Thana- NAUTAN District- West Champaran ====================================================== Jitendra Patel S/o Sri Paras Patel R/o village- Baikunthwa, P.S.- Nautan, District- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 02-02-2021 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 01.05.2020 in connection with Nautan (Jagdishpur) P.S. Case No. 131 of 2020 for the offences alleged under Sections 379, 380, 457, 511, 413, 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated along with two other co-accused who were apprehended near the house of the informant. It is submitted that the petitioner was caught by the villagers merely on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36897 of 2020(2) dt.02-02-2021 2/2 suspicion after disbelieving that he was a resident of adjoining village. No recovery has been made from the conscious or constructive possession of the petitioner, who claims clean antecedents.

4. Learned APP, on the other hand, invites reference to the impugned order from which it transpires that a Hero Honda Hunk motorcycle bearing Registration No. BR22E5584 and one half H.P. electric water motor have been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner.

5. Having regard to the nature of accusations and the gravity of the offence alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner. The bail petition stands dismissed.

6. 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