Pradeep Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80906 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-234 Year-2024 Thana- CHIRAIYA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Pradeep Kumar Yadav Son of Birendra Yadav Village- Paliya Phulwariya, P.S.- Ramnagr, District- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Milind Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 11-02-2025 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Chiraiya P.S. Case No. 234 of 2024 for the offence punishable under section 394 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 03.06.2024 by the informant, Karan Kumar.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant has alleged that he is running the customer service center of State Bank of India. On the fateful day, he was coming with an amount of Rs. 10,76,360/- when the accused persons intercepted on gun point, assaulted him with the butt of the pistol, causing injury, thereafter from the dicky, the amount was taken. This led to the FIR.
4. Subsequently, during the investigation, the accused persons were arrested and one Anish Raj made confessional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80906 of 2024(2) dt.11-02-2025 2/2 statement in which the name of the petitioner cropped up. The petitioner is/was also a beneficiary of Rs. 3,40,000/- and another accused, Khusranjan Kumar has also given the name of the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR nor in the confessional statement, the alleged act of snatching the money is assigned to him.
6. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail and has taken this Court to the learned Sessions Judge order according to which, the accused persons in their confessional statement had given the name of this petitioner and also stated that he is/was also the beneficiary of the amount of Rs. 3,40,000/-.
7. In that background, for the present, this Court is not inclined to extend him privilege of bail.
8. The present bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U T