Tulsi Kumar @ Abhijit Kumar @ Rajesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72347 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2022 Thana- RAJAON District- Banka ====================================================== TULSI KUMAR @ ABHIJIT KUMAR @ RAJESH KUMAR Son of Late Prasadi Rai R/V- Bhadrar, P.S-Banka Dist- Banka ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mritunjay Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 28-04-2023 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Rajoun P.S. Case No. 31 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation, after taking over the motorcycle of the informant, unknown criminals looted Rs. 5,500/- and a golden locket from the possession of the informant. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72347 of 2022(4) dt.28-04-2023 2/2 been implicated in this case. Nothing was recovered from his possession. He has submitted further that the name of the petitioner has figured in confessional statement of Shakti Yadav @ Shiv Shakti Yadav and Shakti Yadav @ Shiv Shakti Yadav has also named one co-accused Bulla @ Sudhanshu, who has been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court.

On the other hand, the learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner has a strong criminal antecedents of six cases of similar nature, whereas co-accused, who has been granted bail had only two criminal antecedents.

In my view, the petitioner does not deserve the privileges for bail, which is hereby rejected. If the trial is not concluded within a period of nine months, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail in the court below itself.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/Kundan U T