Patna High CourtCR. MISC./69554/2024withdrawn

Jitan Kumar @ Jitan Rai @ Sawan @ Jitendra Rai v. The State Of Bihar

2024-12-13Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69554 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-632 Year-2023 Thana- NAGAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Jitan Kumar @ Jitan Rai @ Sawan @ Jitendra Rai S/O Rajeshwar Rai R/O Village/Mohalla- Subhash Chok, P.S- Hajipur Town, Distt.- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vasant Vikas For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bishweshwar Ram ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-12-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of six cases, out of which three cases are under the excise act. It is next submitted in sum and substance that the allegation is of looting the informant of Rs. 15,87,400/- when he was going to deposit the said amount in the bank on point of gun.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the FIR was against unknown and the name of the petitioner transpired during the course of investigation in the confessional statement of co-accused Dhiraj Kumar and thereafter when petitioner was arrested, he also confessed about his participation in the crime. It is further submitted that any statement made

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69554 of 2024(2) dt.13-12-2024 2/2 before the police does not have any evidentiary value and the petitioner is in custody since 01.05.2024.

4. The learned APP for the State submits that petitioner has antecedent of six cases though his name has transpired based on confessional statement, but if petitioner is granted the privilege of bail, he may abscond.

5. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the bail application with liberty to renew the prayer for bail of the petitioner after framing of charge.

6. Permission is accorded.

7. Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T