Patna High CourtCR. MISC./60860/2017rejected

Awadh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2018-01-17Mr. Justice Arun Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.61771 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -298 Year- 2017 Thana -RAMPUR District- GAYA ====================================================== Surendra Kumar S/o Balchand Yadav, R/o Village- Nagar, P.S.- Hunterganj, District- Chatra (Jharkhand).

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.60860 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -298 Year- 2017 Thana -RAMPUR District- GAYA ====================================================== Awadh Kumar, Son of Pramod Sao, @ Pramod Sah Resident of VillageKaluakala, P.s.-Barachatty, District-Gaya. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

(In Cr.Misc. No.61771 of 2017) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravindra Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Sanjay Kumar Pandey (In Cr.Misc. No.60860 of 2017) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivendra Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Ansarul Haque ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 17-01-2018 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the State. Both the bail applications (Cr. Misc. No. 61771 of 2017 and Cr. Misc. No. 60860 of 2017) are being disposed of by this common order as both of them arise out of same police case. Petitioners, already in custody, seeks bail in Rampur PS Case No. 298 of 2017 registered under Sections 413, 414 and 34 of the IPC.

The allegation in brief is that three persons were

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.61771 of 2017 (3) dt.17-01-2018 apprehended by the police on the road with the stolen motorcycle and no document was produced.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the motorcycles were not recovered from the possession of the petitioners though the allegation is that the motorcycles were recovered from the possession of the petitioners. The prayer for bail of the petitioners is at present rejected. The petitioners may renew the prayer for bail after six months.

(Arun Kumar, J.) Snkumar/- U T