Patna High CourtCR. MISC./80835/2024bail rejected

Jawahir Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2024-11-25Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80835 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2024 Thana- DHANAHA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Jawahir Yadav Son of Late Dukhi Yadav Resident of Village - Jawahiya, P.S. - Dhanaha, District - West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 25-11-2024 Heard Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Dhanaha P.S. Case No. 53 of 2024 for the offence under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 15.03.2024 by the informant, Arjun Yadav.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that he being the Branch Field Officer in Bharat Financial Institution Limited at Padraun Branch, after holding meeting and collecting cash of Rs.2,86,509/- left for the branch when the accused persons intercepted and took away the amount after assault for which he has to be shifted to hospital. This led to the F.I.R.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80835 of 2024(2) dt.25-11-2024 2/2 F.I.R. is against unknown, he was remanded in this case on 28.8.2024 but No TI Parade conducted and has already suffered.

5. Learned APP for the State, on other hand, has taken this Court to para-3 to show that he has 28 criminal antecedents of different Sections and there is grave allegation that when the Officer from financial institution returning after collecting the amount, not only the money was taken away but also was assaulted.

6. Considering the allegation that has come against the petitioner as also the fact that he has more than two dozen criminal cases under his belt, in that background, this Court is not inclined to extend him any relief for the present.

7. Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Amandeep/- U T