Patna High CourtCR. MISC./26806/2017dismissed

Mukesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2017-07-11Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.26806 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -473 Year- 2015 Thana -JAHANABAD District- JEHANABAD ======================================================

1. Mukesh Kumar Son of Sakaldeo Yadav, Resident of Village- Sangatpar, P.S.- Jehanabad, District- Jahanabad.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Manoj Kumar - 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 11-07-2017 Heard the parties.

This application is for grant of regular bail in connection with Jehanabad P.S.Case No.473 of 2015, registered for the offences under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation as per F.I.R. is that while the informant was coming to the Bank, he was intercepted by four accused persons and on the point of Pistol they have snatched the bag of the informant. On the information, the police party reached there, however they succeeded in fleeing away. The F.I.R. further shows that the persons present there named the accused persons including the petitioner.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that they have been falsely implicated in this case and nothing has been

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26806 of 2017 (2) dt.11-07-2017 2/2 recovered.

It has also been submitted that one of the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court, vide order dated 21.7.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No.20997 of 2016. So far antecedent of the petitioner is concerned, it is submitted that he is on bail in all those cases. Further submission is that the petitioner is in custody since 16.02.2017.

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides and one of the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court, however, as the petitioner is accused in three other cases also. As such, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, he may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge or after three months from today, whichever is earlier.

With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U T