Ram Bhaju Yadav @ Rambhajju Yadav@Gorelal Yadav@Gorelal@Ram Bhaju v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.54295 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -592 Year- 2014 Thana -ARA NAWADA District- BHOJPUR ====================================================== RAM BHAJU YADAV @ RAMBHAJJU YADAV@GORELAL YADAV@GORELAL@RAM BHAJU S/o Preman Yadav, resident of Village- Rewada, P.S.- Barachatti, District- Gaya. .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madhuranand Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 26-10-2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in paragraph-1 of the petition in the course of the day.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
Petitioner prays for bail in connection with Ara Nawada P.S.Case No. 592 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under Section 395 and subsequently added Section 412 of the Indian Penal Code.
Allegation is of committing dacoity in Manipuram Gold Finance Ltd. office and taking away gold, cash, etc. by the miscreants. Petitioner is not named in the FIR and during investigation his name transpired in the confessional statement of co-accused.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54295 of 2018 (4) dt.26-10-2018 2/2 Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that except confessional statement there is nothing against him and he has not been put on TIP and so far criminal antecedents are concerned, most of the cases he has been acquitted. Further submission is that other accused persons have been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Annexure-2 series. Heard learned APP also, who has opposed the prayer for bail stating that petitioner is accused in 21 other cases of similar type.
Having heard both sides and in the facts and circumstances, as stated above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
However, once charge has been framed in this case, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.
With the above observation, this application is dismissed. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U T