Petitioners challenging a criminal case implicating them in robbery sought bail. The High Court rejected the bail application, noting the accused were apprehended, identified by the victim, and ATM cards were recovered.
Bail application rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.39911 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -152 Year- 2016 Thana -SUGAULI DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI)
| ====================================================== 1. Chitranjan Kumar Mishra Son of Late Ram Saran Mishra Resident of Village- Ribilganj Jigna Tiwary Tola P.S.- Ribilganj, Dist- Saran at Chapra. 2. Tunna Pandey Son of Birendra Pandey Resident of Village- Matkeshari, P.S. Jalalpur Dist- Saran at Chapra. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== |
|---|
| Appearance : |
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Advocate |
| For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Uday Chand Prasad, APP |
| ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER |
2 17-09-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned APP.
Both the petitioners, who robbed Manoj Sah, were apprehended, on being chased by the informant, and during course thereof, they were also identified by Manoj Sah who was following them and further, on search apart from cash, different ATM Cards were seized from the possession of both the petitioners and for that, seizure list has been prepared containing signatures of both the petitioners.
It has been submitted on behalf of petitioners that the aforesaid vehicle belongs to petitioner no.2, Tunna Pandey. It has further been submitted that they have been falsely implicated in this case on account of vehicle meeting with an accident. It has
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39911 of 2016 (2) dt.17-09-2016
2
also been submitted that the investigation is going on and uptil now, police failed to locate the identity of different ATM Cards shown to be recovered from both the petitioners.
Learned APP opposed the prayer for bail.
From the self statement of the informant itself, there happens to be divulgence of a theme that just after arrest of both the petitioners, alleged victim Manoj Sah who was following the miscreants arrived and had identified the petitioners to be his robbers.
Consequent thereupon, I do not see it a fit case for
grant of bail. The same is, hereby, rejected.
(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J)
perwez
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are eligible for bail in a robbery case involving antecedent of false implication
Chitranjan Kumar Mishra
Tunna Pandey
The State of Bihar
ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
