Dharamraj Yadav @ Dharmraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.35756 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-161 Year-2018 Thana- HILSA District- Nalanda ====================================================== Mantu Paswan, Son of Rajesh Paswan, Resident of Village Koklakchak, Godiha, Noor Sarai, P.S. Noor Sarai, District Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No. 36147 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-161 Year-2018 Thana- HILSA District- Nalanda ====================================================== Arun Paswan, Son of Shiv Nandan Paswan, Resident of Village Chandasi, P.S. Noor Sarai, District Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No. 36140 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-161 Year-2018 Thana- HILSA District- Nalanda ====================================================== Dharamraj Yadav @ Dharmraj Kumar, Son of Rameshwar Yadav, Resident of Village Chandasi, P.S. Noorsarai, District Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

(In Criminal Miscellaneous No. 35756 of 2018) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rana Baljit Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Murlidhar (In Criminal Miscellaneous No. 36147 of 2018) For the Petitioner :

Mr. Rana Baljit Singh, Advocate Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :

Md. Mushtaque Alam, APP (In Criminal Miscellaneous No. 36140 of 2018) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Shyam Bihari Singh ======================================================

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.35756 of 2018(4) dt.26-07-2018 2/3 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 26-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned APP for the State.

Petitioners, already in custody, seek bail in connection with Hilsa P.S. Case No.161 of 2018 registered under Sections 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation in brief is that the informant boarded the auto-rickshaw, already four persons on board, when the tempo started, they robbed the informant of Rs.910/-, the informant raised alarm and thereafter police reached there and apprehended all the culprits and recovered Rs. 910/- looted from the informant from the auto-rickshaw and also a country made pistol kept in the auto-rickshaw.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were also passengers in auto-rickshaw, there is no specific recovery of the money from the petitioners; whereas the learned counsel for the State submits that it is a kind of organized crime and each one were involved in looting the informant and recovery of looted money was also made from the tempo as well as country made pistol with live cartridge and all these three petitioners have criminal antecedents of similar nature.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.35756 of 2018(4) dt.26-07-2018 3/3 Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the prayer of bail of the petitioners, at present, is rejected with a direction to expedite the trial and preferably conclude the same within a year.

However, if the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period, the petitioners may renew their prayer of bail. (Arun Kumar, J) S.KUMAR/- U T