Gaurav Anand @ Chhotu Argariya v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51029 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2024 Thana- BALUA BAZAR District- Supaul ====================================================== Gaurav Anand @ Chhotu Argariya Son Of Ram Shankar Argariya Resident Of Village - Matiyari, Ward No. 14, Police Station - Balua Bazar ... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arun For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Syed Mojibur Rahman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 23-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case instituted for the offence under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, registered in connection with Balua Bazar P.S. Case No. 8 of 2024.

3. As per prosecution case, some unknown persons have looted the informant's motorcycle, mobile, cash and other articles.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. He submitted that except confession, there is nothing against the petitioner. The recovered mobile was not put on T.I.P. Petitioner is in custody since 08.02.2024.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51029 of 2024(3) dt.23-09-2024 2/2 application for bail and submitted that during course of investigation, the name of the petitioner has figured in this case. He submitted that alleged stolen Sim Card No. 90417395XX has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and the same belongs to the informant, which has come in para-15 of the case diary and from para-14 of the case diary, it is also apparent that on the basis of self confession of the petitioner, the stolen articles have been recovered. He further submitted that petitioner has been made accused in six more cases. During investigation several witnesses have also supported the prosecution case.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation and petitioner having strong criminal antecedents, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Arish/- U T