← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./79863/2019dismissed

Deo Kumar Mahto @ Deo Kumar @ Mia v. The State Of Bihar

2020-01-14Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79863 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2019 Thana- NAYAGAON District- Saran ====================================================== Deo Kumar Mahto @ Deo Kumar @ Mia, Son of Rajendra Mahto, Resident of Village- Govindchal (Ambedkar Nagar), P.S.- Sonpur, District- Saran at Chapra.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shruti Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 14-01-2020 Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Nayagaon P. S. Case No. 59 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 356, 379 of IPC.

As per F.I.R. while the informant has come to open the shop, some miscreants came by Apache Motorcycle snatched the bag containing Rs.1,50,000/- as well as key of the motorcycle, finger print register, cheque books, C.S.P. Stamp and etc. It further appears that F.I.R. is against unknown, but later on, petitioner was arrested on the same motorcycle along with cash and as such, he has been remanded in this case. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that after arrest, he has been made accused in two different cases and in this case, one of the co- accused has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 17.09.2019

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79863 of 2019(4) dt.14-01-2020 2/2 passed in Criminal Misc. No. 58256 of 2019 and the petitioner has also been granted bail in the case, in which, there was recovery. He is in custody since 21.10.2019.

Heard learned A.P.P. also, who has opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that Para 26 of the case diary clearly disclosed that the motorcycle was recovered from the petitioner along with looted cash.

Having heard both sides, in view of the submissions, made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

With the above observations, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sunil Shukla/- U T