Md Jawed @ Guddu Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16704 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-509 Year-2023 Thana- JOKIHAT District- Araria

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Md Jawed @ Guddu Son of late Md. Aiyub Resident of vill.-Matiyari, Ward No.-09, P.S.-Jokihat, Distt.-Araria

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Indu Kumari Srivastava, APP ======================================================

¶7

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶8

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶9

2 20-03-2024

¶10

Heard Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶11

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Jokihat P.S. Case No. 509 of 2023, registered for the offences punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

Allegedly, the informant who happens to be a Field Officer in L&T Finance went for collection of due amount, in the meantime, he was intercepted by two persons and they snatched the bag of the informant containing valuables and the cash amount of Rs. 76,750/-. On protest being made, he was also assaulted by the miscreants.

¶13

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16704 of 2024(2) dt.20-03-2024 2/3

¶15

FIR has been instituted against two unknown miscreants, however, during the course of investigation, the police apprehended one co-accused ‘Rahul’ from whose possession, the motorcycle which was used in the crime and some looted articles were recovered. The name of the petitioner has sprung up on the confessional statement of co-accused and save and except the confessional statement, there is no material nor any incriminating or stolen article was recovered from the whereabouts of the petitioner, however, only on account of the past criminal antecedent, his name has been implicated in this case.

¶16

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the pre-arrest bail application and drawing the attention of this Court to para 3 has submitted that the petitioner bears eight criminal antecedent over his head.

¶17

Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the long list of criminal antecedent of the petitioner, this Court does not incline to accede the prayer of the petitioner and thus, the same stands rejected.

¶18