Amit Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48544 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-47 Year-2023 Thana- MANJHAGARH District- Gopalganj ====================================================== AMIT THAKUR SON OF RAJESHWAR THAKUR RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- TARWA, P.S.- MANJHAGARH, DISTT.- GOPALGANJ ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Mishra Mr. Yogendra Tiwari Mr. Milind Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jagdhar Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 02-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for grant of regular bail as earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 7.11.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 71382 of 2023 which reads as under:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 25.04.2023 in connection with Manjhagarh P.S. Case No. 47 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 307/385/ 387/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner along with others is said to have demanded extortion and for the same, the have shot at the victim.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case because of his criminal antecedents. He further submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48544 of 2024(2) dt.02-08-2024 2/2 no extortion was ever demanded by the petitioner and the informant had not identified the petitioner.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that the petitioner has four criminal antecedents.

6. Considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner which includes similar cases, I am not inclined to grant bail to this petitioner. This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

7. The trial of all the cases registered against the petitioner are directed to be expedited.

8. Let a copy of the order be communicated to the learned District Judge, Gopalganj as well as to the Superintendent of Police, Gopalganj through FAX/e-mail forthwith for compliance of the order.

3. Upon perusal of the earlier order, the materials available on record and the impugned order, this Court finds no new ground to review its earlier order.

4. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U T