Md Javed @ Niyaj v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62274 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2023 Thana- SAKRA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Md Javed @ Niyaj Son of Md kamar Resident of Village- Kasbe Ahar, P.S.- Tajpur, Distt.- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Md. Hussamuddin Azad, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Shakir Ahmad CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-11-2024 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail, who is in custody in connection with Sakra P.S. Case No. 14 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. While the informant was going to Muzaffarpur on his motorcycle, in the meantime, two of the miscreants, boarded on a motorcycle intercepted him and on the point of pistol snatched his motorcycle and flew away.

4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that the FIR has been instituted against unknown miscreants. However, during the course of investigation, the petitioner was apprehended with a motorcycle giving rise to Musrigharari P.S. Case No. 53 of 2023 and, thereafter, his name has also been remanded in the present case. Save and except the aforesaid fact

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62274 of 2024(3) dt.20-11-2024 2/2 that the petitioner was apprehend with a motorcycle, there is no cogent material. Though the motorcycle which was said to have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, the registration number of which does not tally with the motorcycle of the informant, and the same is not the subject matter of the crime in question. It is next contended that be that as it may, now the investigation of the crime is complete and the petitioner has been incarcerated since 23.04.2024.

5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that the petitioner bears eight criminal antecedents apart from the recovery of a motorcycle from the possession of the petitioner, clearly suggest his involvement in the crime.

6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the materials collected during the course of investigation and the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not acceded to the prayer of the petitioner and accordingly the prayer for bail of the petitioner is stands rejected. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after farming of the charge. (Harish Kumar, J.) Jyoti Kumari/- U T