Rahul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 74689 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-254 Year-2022 Thana- WARISNAGAR District- Samastipur ====================================================== RAHUL KUMAR SON OF UPENDRA MAHTO R/O VILLAGE- MATUA, P.S.- WARIS NAGAR, DISTRICT- SAMASTIPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mukesh Kumar No1 For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 05-04-2023 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 Waris Nagar P.S. Case No. 254 of 2022, registered for offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code and later on, Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code has been added.

As per allegation, the informant runs customer service center. On 04.08.2022, he withdrew Rs. 60,000/-. When he was going to his house, in the way two persons on bike came there. They stopped him and snatched the key of his motorcycle and at the point of arms, they also snatched his money, mobile set, driving licence, ATM and cheque-book.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 74689 of 2022(4) dt.05-04-2023 2/2 the present case. He was arrested in another case and he has been made accused in the present case only on the basis of his confessional statement. He has submitted further that the petitioner was not put on T.I.P.

On the other hand, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the confessional statement of the petitioner has also been recorded in the present case, which is in paragraph 37 of the case diary, in which he has confessed his guilt. On the basis of confessional statement, the looted mobile of the informant was recovered, as such, the confessional statement is leading to recovery. There are seven criminal antecedents against the petitioner.

Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, and also considering the fact that the petitioner is involved in seven cases and some of them are of similar nature, I am not inclined to grant him bail, which is hereby rejected.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Mahesh/Alok U T