Patna High CourtCR. MISC./39838/2025dismissed

Uma Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

2025-07-09Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39838 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2025 Thana- CHAND District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Uma Prasad S/o Loknath R/o Village- Gayapur, P.S.- Sahebganj, DistrictChandauli (U.P.) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajani Kant Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Umesh Lal Verma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 09-07-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. This application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection with Chand P.S. Case No. 114 of 2025 registered for the offence under Section 309(4) of the BNS, 2023.

3. As per the prosecution case, unknown criminals dashed their motorcycle and looted Rs. 1,90,000/- from the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 3.5.2025 and he has clean antecedent.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39838 of 2025(2) dt.09-07-2025 2/2

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that one co-accused Suraj Chauhan has already been granted bail by this Court.

6. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application of the petitioner for grant of bail and has submitted that during investigation, one Arvind Ram was caught and Rs. 15,000/- of the looted amount was recovered from him. He further submits that the informant side had made a video of the motorcycle which was found fleeing and in the video the registration number of the motorcycle was also captured. He further submits that in the self-inculpatory statement, Arvind Ram has named the petitioner as the owner of the motorcycle which was used in the loot. In the tower location also, the presence of the petitioner has also come on the place of occurrence.

7. Considering the participation of the petitioner in the alleged crime and also considering the materials available on record, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U