Bikash Kumar Yadav @ Bikash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67398 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-136 Year-2024 Thana- SAKRI District- Madhubani ====================================================== Bikash Kumar Yadav @ Bikash Kumar S/O Kamal Narayan Yadav R/O Village- Laxmipur, P.S- Sakri, Distt.- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ratnakar Jha, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Pronoti Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 01-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case instituted for the offence under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per prosecution case, the informant alleged that he runs Urea Pump, where his nephew was sleeping, in the meantime, some unknown miscreants came there and started assaulting him and taken away his mobile along with cash of Rs. 21,000/-

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. On the basis of suspicion, the name of the petitioner figured in this case. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 02.07.2024.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67398 of 2024(2) dt.01-10-2024 2/2 application for bail and submitted that during course of investigation, the name of the petitioner has figured in this case. He submitted that on the basis of confessional statement of the petitioner the alleged robbed mobile and motorcycle were recovered from the possession of co-accused persons. He further submitted that the tower location of the petitioner's mobile and other co-accused persons were detected near the alleged place of occurrence and the miscreants caused several injuries to the victim while robbing. He further submitted that petitioner having one criminal antecedent. During investigation several witnesses have also supported the prosecution case.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

7. The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Arish/- U T