Dharma Doha @ Ravi Doha @ Vicky Dohar @ Dharma Dom @ Ravi Dom @ Vicky Dom v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77680 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-263 Year-2024 Thana- RAMPUR District- Gaya ====================================================== Dharma Doha @ Ravi Doha @ Vicky Dohar @ Dharma Dom @ Ravi Dom @ Vicky Dom Son of Late Mannu Dom @ Late Mannu Ram @ Late Rajendra Dom R/O- Mohalla-Muri Hill, Dom Toli,Gaya Kotwali, Gaya and at present at Mohalla- Gewal Bigha, Rampur, Distt.- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 12-11-2024 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Rampur P.S. Case No. 263 of 2024 for the offence punishable under sections 457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 06.06.2024 by the informant, Purnendu Shekhar.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that in the morning, the suitcase containing valuable materials of his son including Rs. 50,000/- and ornaments went missing, it also included the I-Phone/laptop. Everything was recorded in the CCTV, which followed the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has criminal antecedent which led to his custody in the present case also. Further, his confessional statement has no value in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77680 of 2024(2) dt.12-11-2024 2/2 eyes of law.
5. Learned APP, on the other hand, has taken this Court to paragraph 3 to show that he has seven criminal cases of the same nature and allegation is against this petitioner who has also confessed to it.
6. Considering the submissions put forward by the parties as also the fact that he has criminal antecedent of the same nature, for the present, this Court is not inclined to extend him the privilege of bail, which is accordingly rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U T