Navlesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70601 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-305 Year-2022 Thana- SOHSARAI District- Nalanda ====================================================== Navlesh Kumar Son Of Late Kailash Sao Resident Of Village -AMAWAMA, Ps -BIND, Dist- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Gopal Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 09-11-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sohsarai P.S. Case No.305 of 2022, lodged on 09.11.2022, under Sections 457/380 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against unknown accused persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He further submits that petitioner is not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioner has figured in this case by virtue of confessional statement of co-accused, who has alleged that he has sold the theft articles in the shop of the petitioner and the theft article has been recovered from the shop of the petitioner. Counsel submits
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70601 of 2023(2) dt.09-11-2023 2/2 that antecedent of the petitioner is not clean. There are three criminal cases pending against him and in one case he has been granted bail and in rest cases he is persuading bail.
5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is the person who used to purchase the stolen article and on his confessional statement stolen property has been recovered from his shop.
6. In this background, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail six months after framing of the charge.
(Dr. Anshuman, J) Mkr./- U T