Patna High CourtCR. MISC./45388/2024dismissed

Reyaj Alam @ Reyaj v. The State Of Bihar

2024-07-03Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45388 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2024 Thana- MUFFASIL District- West Champaran ====================================================== Reyaj Alam @ Reyaj S/o Harun Dewan Resident of vill-Jaukatiya, Nai Dih, P.S.- Majhauliya, District- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjeev Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Navin Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 03-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bettiah Muffasil P.S. Case No. 216 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 414, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and others were caught red handed committing ATM fraud and they were handed over to the police.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated by the co-villagers.

5. He further submits that the petitioner in jail since 23.04.2024 and has clean antecedents.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45388 of 2024(2) dt.03-07-2024 2/2

6. I have considered the submission of the parties.

7. Five ATM cards, a mobile phone of OPPO company, a Super Splendor Hero Motorcycle and Rs. 25,000/- were recovered from the possession of one co-accused Alamgir Alam. A debit card of Punjab National Bank was recovered from the pocket of the petitioner. Another debit card was also recovered from the co-accused Shahid.

8. Considering the fact that the petitioner was caught red-handed in committing ATM fraud, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

9. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

10. The Court below is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and conclude the same at the earliest. If the trial is delayed due to the fault of the prosecution side then the petitioner may renew his prayer for grant of bail.

11. So far as bail of other co-accused persons is concerned, the Court below is directed to consider their bail application after going through the present order. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U T