Patna High CourtCR. MISC./51592/2024dismissed

Santosh Kumar Chourasia v. The State Of Bihar

2024-09-25Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51592 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2024 Thana- Rasalpur District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Santosh Kumar Chourasia Son of Ramswroop Modi R/o Village - Pakkisarai, P.S.- Ghogha, Dist.- Bhagalpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajive Ranjan Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Zainul Abedin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 25-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Rasalpur P.S. Case No. 08 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Section-394 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per allegation, the pick up Van of the informant bearing Registration No. BR01GN 1898 was stolen away by the accused persons.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case. It has further been submitted that he was not arrested at the spot and nothing was recovered from his possession. Except confessional statement of the petitioner,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51592 of 2024(3) dt.25-09-2024 2/2 there is nothing against him.

5. On the otherhand, Mr. Shailendra Kumar, learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that in his confessional statement (paragraph-22 of the case diary), the petitioner has given vivid description of the entire occurrence, in which, he has stated that looted pick up van was handed over to one Rajesh Kumar. From perusal of paragraph-26 of the case diary, it appears that the police recovered that pick up van from possession of said Rajesh Kumar. As such, the confessional statement of the petitioner led to recovery of pick up Van. It has also been submitted that the petitioner is involved in other cases of similar nature.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I think that the petitioner does not deserve bail and accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) A.K.V.//- U T