Dudhani Mishra @ Rahul Mishra @ Rahul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65336 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-115 Year-2016 Thana- MOKAMAH District- Patna ====================================================== Dudhani Mishra @ Rahul Mishra @ Rahul Kumar, Son of Rajendra Mishra Resident of Village- Sokahara, Tiwari Tola, P.S.- Fulwariya, DistrictBegusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Raju Kumar Goswami, Advocate and Mr. Kumar Rajdeep, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-03-2023 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove defect (s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks on resumption of physical mode. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, two miscreants came on a motorcycle and snatched the bag of the informant containing Rs. 2,30,000/-, thereafter the miscreants fled away. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65336 of 2022(3) dt.13-03-2023 2/2 the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is not named in the FIR and the name of the petitioner has sprung up in the confessional statement of co-accused Kundan Tiwari. No T.I. Parade has been conducted by the prosecution. The petitioner is in custody since 22.08.2022. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner above-named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Barh (Patna) in connection with Mokamah P.S. Case No. 115 of 2016. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Arish/- U T