Patna High CourtCR. MISC./2210/2021dismissed

Chandan Kumar@Mukhiya v. The State Of Bihar

2021-01-25Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2210 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-233 Year-2019 Thana- KANKARBAG District- Patna ====================================================== CHANDAN KUMAR@MUKHIYA Son of Narendra Kumar @ Navendu Kumar Resident of Village- Bari Att, P.S.- Ben, District- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ganesh Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. J.K.Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 25-01-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an undertaking to remove all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter as and when required. It is accordingly directed that all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter be removed within one month hereof.

2. The petitioner, who is in custody since 24.01.2020 has renewed his prayer for bail in connection with Kankarbagh P.S. Case No.233 of 2019, having earlier been rejected by order dated 29.06.2020 in Cr. Misc. No. 21134 of 2020 for the alleged offences under Sections 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that except suspicion there is no objective material to connect the petitioner with the alleged occurrence. The petitioner's name

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2210 of 2021(2) dt.25-01-2021 2/2 has transpired on the confessional statement of co-accused Ajit Kumar, who has since been granted bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 87049 of 2019 (Annexure-3).

4. Learned APP appears and has been heard.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having regard to the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner. The petition stands dismissed.

6. The petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

7. Office shall follow-up to ensure that all defects are removed and compliance with the notices of this Court are made by the petitioner within the stipulated time provided in para 1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Vikash Jain, J) HR/- U T