Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.23267 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Kundan Mahto Son Of Late Jainandan Mahto Village Tawakla, P.S. Parasi, District Aurangabad .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar .... Opposite Party ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL PRASAD ORAL ORDER 4 06-09-2012 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. This is a petition for grant of regular bail for offence under [STATUTE] . The name of the petitioner finds place in the confessional statement of the co-accused, Satyendra Verma. However, from the possession of the petitioner Rs.20,000/- has been recovered. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in jail since 03.01.2012, but, neither the petitioner nor Rs.20,000/- has been put on test identification parade and the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. The learned counsel for the State did not point out any material to show that the said Rs.20,000/- is looted amount of the Bank. Hence, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Mehendia P.S. Case No. 106 of 2011 to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad. SA/- (Gopal Prasad, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 392

Statute Text:
Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. Robbery. Whoever commits robbery shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and, if the robbery be committed on the highway between sunset and sunrise, the imprisonment may be extended to fourteen years.