Sujit Kumar @ Sujit Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.49660 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -937 Year- 2017 Thana -KATIHAR District- KATIHAR ======================================================

1. Sujit Kumar @ Sujit Yadav S/o Naresh Yadav, R/o Rasalpur, P.S.- Nawgachhia, Distt.- Bhagalpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Anusuiya Jaiswal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 04-10-2018 The petitioner is in custody since 12.03.2018 in connection with Katihar Town P.S. Case No. 937 of 2017, registered for offences punishable under Sections 395, 397 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Allegation as per F.I.R. is of committing dacoity in the shop of the informant and looting away the ornaments and other articles. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and it appears from impugned order that in para 104 of the case diary, it is mentioned that his participation was captured in the CCTV footage at the time of keeping ornaments in the bag.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Earlier, he is accused in Kursela P.S. Case No. 220 of 2017 and from that he

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49660 of 2018 (3) dt.04-10-2018 2/2 has been remanded in this case. Further submission is that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and he is in custody since 12.03.2018.

Heard learned A.P.P. also, who has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner stating that from perusal of the impugned order apart from his participation was captured in CCTV footage, there was recovery of ornaments also.

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances as stated above, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, the application is dismissed. However, learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/Amjad/- U T