Pappu Patel @ Pappu Kumar And ANR v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.55538 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-192 Year-2017 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran ======================================================
1. Pappu Patel @ Pappu Kumar, Son of Ganga Patel @ Gagandeo Patel,
2. Arun Patel @ Arun Kumar, Son of Sudama Patel @ Sudama Prasad, Both are resident of Village- Chargahan, P.S.- Mufassil, Bettiah, District- West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Md. Anis Akhtar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. MD. SUFIYAN ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 15-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Sugauli P. S. Case No. 192 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 413, 414 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
Allegedly, on getting information, the informant and other Police personnel went at the place of occurrence and saw two persons sitting on Appache motorcycle coming from Azad Chowk, they were stopped and were apprehended and after search two tools for breaking the locks of the motorcycle of different size were recovered and for Appache Motorcycle no
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55538 of 2017(3) dt.15-01-2018 2/2 paper was produced. They confessed their guilt and stated the names of the petitioners also and further stated that one stolen motorcycle is kept in the house of petitioner no. 1, thereafter, raid was made at the house of petitioner no. 1 and one Hero Honda Motorcycle bearing registration no. BR05L-1357 was recovered from the house of petitioner no.1.
Submission is of false implication and that the petitioners have been made accused only on the basis of confessional statement, the alleged seizure list is not in accordance with law, the house is a joint house and as such the petitioners deserve sympathetic consideration to which learned APP seriously opposes.
In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering that investigation is still going on and further from the house of petitioner no. 1 stolen motorcycle was recovered and as such, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, accordingly, their such prayer stands rejected. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T