Ranjan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60668 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-278 Year-2023 Thana- BARHARA District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Ranjan Yadav S/o- Late Kala Yadav Village- Matukpur PS- Barhara DisttBhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Binay Kumar Sinha, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 04-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Barhara P.S. Case No. 278 of 2023 dated 10.05.2023, lodged under Section 392 of the I.P.C.

3. As per the prosecution case, the F.I.R. has been lodged against unknown accused persons, who came on two motorcycles and have committed robbery with the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He further submits that the name of the petitioner has not figured in this case, his name has figured in this case by virtue of the confessional statement of the co-accused, namely, Vicky Kumar. He further submits that petitioner is in custody since 01.05.2024 having three criminal antecedents pending against him in which he is on bail.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60668 of 2024(2) dt.04-09-2024 2/2

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the snatched mobile has been recovered from the possession of co-accused Vicky Kumar and it is the Vicky Kumar's statement, the name of the petitioner has figured in this case. He further submits that the present case is not only based on the confessional statement, rather the corroboration is also there.

6. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and, therefore, his bail petition is hereby rejected.

7. However, liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail, three months after framing of charge.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has taken the plea that co-accused Vicky Kumar has been granted bail in this matter.

9. With this observation, the bail application stands rejected.

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