Latif Khan @ Laddu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62238 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-137 Year-2022 Thana- ROHTAS District- Rohtas ====================================================== Latif Khan @ Laddu, Male Aged About 40 Yrs, Son Of Sube Khan R/O Village- Utawar, P.S.- Utawar, District- Palwal, State- Harayana ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shiv Prasad Gupta, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 06-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Bihar. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Rohtas PS Case No. 137 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 461, 380 of the Indian Penal Code (for brevity IPC). Later on Sections 401, 379, 436,463, 450, 457 and 120B/34 of the IPC has been added.

The informant has alleged that ATM has been cut and cash to the tune of 24,59,000/- (Twenty Four Lacs Fifty Nine Thousand) has been taken away. The entire occurrence has been recorded in the CC TV footage.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of antecedents (eight 08), the petitioner's name has been dragged in this case. There is no recovery of any incriminating material from possession of the petitioner. The defence is of total denial of the allegation whatsoever. The petitioner is in custody since 26-05-2022. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail. Referring to the order of rejection passed by learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram, dated 23-09-2022, learned APP

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62238 of 2022(2) dt.06-02-2023 2/2 points out that in the investigation, material has surfaced by way of recovery of the boxes, which were thrown by the petitioner, and on his statement, petitioner's involvement, therefore, is established in the investigation.

This Court, considering the rival submissions, period of custody as also his antecedents, for limited consideration of the plea for bail, is inclined to accept the submissions advanced by learned APP.

Prayer for bail made on behalf of the petitioner is rejected, for the present.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) shyambihari/- U T