Ujjawal Giri v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52573 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2023 Thana- GOVINDGANJ District- East Champaran ====================================================== UJJAWAL GIRI SON OF JATA SHANKAR GIRI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - ARERAJ, P.S. - GOVINDGANJ (ARERAJ O.P.), DISTRICT - EAST CHAMPARAN ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vijay Shankar Shrivastava, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajendra Nath Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 12-11-2024 Heard Mr. Vijay Shankar Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with Govindganj (Areraj) P.S. Case No. 16 of 2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 392 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 06.01.2023 by the informant, Nitish Kumar.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that the accused persons armed variously came and on the point of pistol took away Rs. 2,30,000/- from the shop. Accordingly, the FIR.

4. The investigation took place in the matter and subsequently, role of the petitioner came and he has been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52573 of 2024(3) dt.12-11-2024 2/2 remanded in the present case on 08.12.2023.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though he is in custody pursuant to the confessional statement made by Sagar Kumar and Gunjan Tiwary, no TIP conducted.

6. Learned APP, Mr. Bharat Bhushan has taken this Court to paragraph-3 to show that not only the petitioner has half a dozen criminal cases under his belt under different sections, his name has cropped up on basis of confessional statements of his associates.

7. Considering the submissions put forward by the parties as also having gone through his criminal antecedents, for the present, this Court is not inclined to extend relief to the petitioner. Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) perwez U T