Vikky Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.658 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-143 Year-2021 Thana- CHAPRA TOWN District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

Vikky Kumar Son of Late Nand Lal Yadav Resident of Village- Kodha, P.S.- Jorwaganj, District- Katihar.

2.

Chhotu Kumar Son of Late Nand Lal Yadav Resident of Village- Kodha, P.S.- Jorwaganj, District- Katihar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shivam For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anil Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 25-04-2022 At the outset, counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to make correction in para 1 and prayer portion of the petition.

Permission is accorded. Necessary correction be done during course of the day.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioners seek bail in Chapra Town P.S. Case No. 143 of 2021 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 503 of 2021, registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, while the informant and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.658 of 2022(4) dt.25-04-2022 2/2 his wife were returning after withdrawing money from the Bank, two persons riding on motorcycle intercepted him and snatched a bag from possession of informant containing cash of Rs. 3,00,000/-, Adhar card, PAN card, Service Book etc. and fled away.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are not named in the FIR. No looted article has been recovered from their possession. Till date petitioners have not been put on test identification parade. Petitioners are in custody since 04.06.2021.

Learned APP however, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that petitioners have got criminal antecedents of similar nature and they are accused in as many as twelve cases.

Considering the facts aforesaid and criminal antecedents, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners abovenamed on bail at this stage. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T