Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7713 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-177 Year-2019 Thana- PARIHAR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== JITENDRA KUMAR @ JITENDRA RAY, s/o Lalu Ray, Resident of VillageJhitkahiya, Ward No.5, P.S. Bathnaha, District- Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pushpendra Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dilip Kumar No.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 03-09-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual Court proceedings. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against the petitioner alongwith other accused persons is said to have looted the informant on the gun point and fled away.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. On the confessional statement of co-accused, petitioner has been made accused in this case. There is no any incriminating articles has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and there is no T.I. Parade till date. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 18.06.2020. The petitioner has 07

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7713 of 2021(3) dt.03-09-2021 2/2 criminal antecedents which is mentioned in para 3 of the bail petition. Similar situated co-accused have been granted bail by different co-ordinate Benches of this Court.

Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail petition and submits that the petitioner is habitual offender.

I perused the record including the case diary, the petitioner has 07 criminal antecedents.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected in connection with Parihar P.S. Case No. 177/2019 from the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Sitamarhi. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

However, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) amitkumar/- U T