Md. Sufaid @ Md. Subaid v. The State Of Bihar
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39108 of 2017 (03) dt.19-09-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.39108 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -144 Year- 2016 Thana -PATAHI DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ======================================================
1. Md. Sufaid @ Md. Subaid S/o Amirullah Resident of village - Alakhbani, P.S. Kalyanpur, District - East Champaran.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nafisuzzoha-Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sakir Ahmad-A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER 19-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
Informant while was returning along with his grand son, who was ill, after visiting the doctor, was intercepted by the criminals, who on the pretext of firearm snatched away his motorcycle, mobile, cash. Accordingly, F.I.R. was registered against unknown.
From perusal of the case diary, it is evident that so many criminals were apprehended relating to Patahi P. S. Case No.154 of 2016 including the petitioner and from Para-32 seizure list, it is evident that looted motorcycle was recovered from his possession which happens to be the subject matter of instant case.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39108 of 2017 (03) dt.19-09-2017 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner happens to be under custody for the last nine months. It has also been submitted that in spite of the fact that informant claimed identification of the culprit, he has not been put on T. I. Parade. It has also been submitted that petitioner has been implicated in so many cases at the instance of the police as detailed under Para-3 of the petition and so, petitioner is entitled for bail.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer.
Considering recovery as well as criminal antecedent, prayer for bail at the present moment is rejected. (Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J) Vikash/- U T