Chotu Sharma @ Ritesh Kumar Sharma v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84724 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-357 Year-2024 Thana- KOILWAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Chotu Sharma @ Ritesh Kumar Sharma S/o Ajay Sharma R/o vill - Khangaon, P.S. - Chandi, Distt.- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 12-12-2024 Heard Ms. Priya, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Koilwar P.S. Case No. 357 of 2024 for the offence punishable under Sections 304, 317(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nagarik, Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, lodged on 09.09.2024 by the informant, Khushi Kumari.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that on the way to home from work, as she was talking to her parents, three accused came in a motorcycle from opposite direction, snatched the mobile and tried to escape. However, on her alarm, the villagers caught hold of one sitting at the last of the motorcycle, while the other two managed to escape. The apprehended person named the two accused, petitioner being one of them. This led to the F.I.R., implication.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84724 of 2024(2) dt.12-12-2024 2/2
4. Though, learned counsel for the petitioner tried to impress upon this Court about his innocence, learned A.P.P. has pointed out that a person who was apprehended on the spot, he gave the name of the two accomplish, the F.I.R. alleges that three accused persons were there, this petitioner has criminal antecedent too.
5. Considering the submissions put forward by the parties, as also the materials on record and coupled with the fact that the petitioner has criminal antecedent, for the present, this Court is not inclined to extend him the privilege of bail.
6. Accordingly, the bail petition stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J.) sadique/- U T