Mayank Kumar @ Rajesh @ Manish v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59353 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-683 Year-2021 Thana- SITAMARHI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Mayank Kumar @ Rajesh @ Manish Son of Umesh Bhagat Resident of Village - Saraiya Ward No. 13 @ Belsand Saraiya Jhanda Chowk, P.S. -Belsand, Dist. - Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Santosh Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 13-11-2024 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial No.140 of 2024 arising out of Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 683 of 2021 dated 25.08.2021, lodged under Sections 302, 307, 120(B), 372 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 27 of the Arms Act pending before the Court of 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi.

3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against 4 named accused persons other than the present petitioner.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59353 of 2024(3) dt.13-11-2024 2/3 has been figured in this case only by virtue of the confessional statement of one Indal Kumar and nothing incriminating has been recovered from the petitioner's possession. Counsel submits that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean as there are two criminal cases pending against him in which in one case, he is on bail and in other, he is persuading for bail. Counsel further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 15.09.2023 in the present case. Counsel submits that the name of the petitioner has been disclosed by virtue of the confessional statement of Indal Kumar on which no reliance could be made and therefore, petitioner deserves grant of bail.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that in this case, case diary, supplementary case diary 1, 2 and 3 has come. Counsel submits that there is specific allegation which has been figured later on in the investigation that the petitioner was present at the place of occurrence at the time of commission of crime and during crime, he was injured and received one fire shot on his shoulder and he was admitted to Nepal and started doing the exportimport of charas and ganja but subsequently, police has arrested him in different case. Counsel further submits that the specific statement of co-accused Prabhu Bhagat has also been there in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59353 of 2024(3) dt.13-11-2024 3/3 the supplementary case diary and Prabhu Bhagat has categorically disclosed about the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of crime. The motorcycle of Prabhu Bhagat has also been recovered which was used in the crime and the said number was also verified by the DTO which was registered in the name of Prabhu Bhagat and the present petitioner has also confessed and disclosed about the said motorcycle in the said crime.

6. In the present facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) Divyansh/- U T