Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21233 of 2012 (2) dt.14-06-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.21233 of 2012 ====================================================== Moti Sah S/o Musai Sah .... .... Petitioner Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 2. 14.06.2012 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner is in custody since 29.11.2011 in connection with alleged offences under [STATUTE] . registered in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 205 of 2011. 3. The allegation is with regard to theft committed in the house of the informant that two suit case and a bag were taken away along with bridal ornaments and cash. The thieves also made away with gold ornaments valued at 60,000/- and case of Rs. 1200/- of informant’s sister, who is said to have identified the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that whereas the theft is said to have taken place at about 1 a.m. on 26/27.11.2011. The informant’s sister spotted the petitioner in torch light at about 3 a.m. It is further stated Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21233 of 2012 (2) dt.14-06-2012 that the petitioner is being targeted by the local police by reason of the petitioner having made written complaint before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. It is also stated that no recovery has been made with the petitioner. It is seen from the order of the learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Samastipur rejecting petitioner’s bail application that Kaushalya Devi, sister of the informant, raised alarm that the petitioner was taking away her attachi and this was heard by the villagers. Para 10 of the police case diary has been referred to and it is noted that she had perfectly identified the petitioner accused at the time of committing the alleged crime. It is also seen that the petitioner is said to be involved in five cases and as such the petitioner does not appear to have clean antecedents. 5. In the above view of the matter, therefore, this Court is not inclined to accept the prayer of the petitioner and the bail petitioner is accordingly dismissed. Fahad. (Vikash Jain, J.)

Applicable IPC Section: 380

Statute Text:
Section 380 of the Indian Penal Code. Theft in a building, tent or vessel. Whoever commits theft in any building, tent or vessel, which building, tent or vessel is used as a human dwelling, or used for the custody of property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.