Suman Kumar @ Vicky Kumar @ Vicky Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66255 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-605 Year-2023 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East Champaran ====================================================== SUMAN KUMAR @ VICKY KUMAR @ VICKY YADAV Son of Rajesh Yadav @ Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Prasad Yadav Resident of Village - Katgenwa, P.S.- Mahuawa, District - East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner.

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Madhurendra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 18-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. While the informant was regressing to his home on 17.08.2023, after selling the milk as he is a milk businessman, and reached at Semra Bridge near Hanuman Temple, three miscreants came on motorcycle, overtake the informant, dashed him and on the point of pistol looted his motorcycle. It is further alleged that on 18.08.2023, the petitioner called the informant and informed him that the looted motorcycle is in possession of co-accused, Pawan Kumar and assured him to return the same after payment of Rs.3000/- but

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66255 of 2024(2) dt.18-10-2024 2/3 the same was not returned to him. Hence, the instant F.I.R. was lodged.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to previous enmity. He was not apprehended on the spot. No incriminating article has been recovered from his conscious physical possession. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. Co-accused, namely, Sunny Yadav and Vikash Kumar and Ranjit Kumar have been enlarged on bail by a co-ordinate bench of this court vide order dated 30.01.2024 and 25.06.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 2348 of 2024 and Cr. Misc. No.37662 of 2024. The petitioner has four criminal antecedents and has been languishing in custody since 29.04.2024.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that considering the nature of the offence and the criminal antecedents, the petitioner does not deserve for bail.

6. In the facts and circumstances of the case and the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for bail is hereby

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66255 of 2024(2) dt.18-10-2024 3/3 rejected. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

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