IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.22119 of 2010 PAWAN @ PAPPU YADAV Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR . ----------- 03/ 25.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner- Pawan @ Pappu Yadav who is in judicial custody since 18.7.2009 in connection with Narpatganj P.S. Case no. 89 of 2009 registered under section 392 IPC and also heard the learned counsel appearing for the State. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with two other accused persons snatched motorcycle, mobile phone, wrist watch and other belongings of the informant and others. It would appear from the case diary as well as submissions of the parties that one motorcycle was recovered from the possession of the petitioner and he made his confessional statement before the police. It would further appear from paragraph 49 of the case diary that the petitioner carries criminal history. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that so-called stolen motorcycle of this case has not been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and as a matter of fact there is nothing on the entire case diary to indicate this fact that recovered motorcycle was stolen property of the instant case and so far as the recovery of motorcycle is concerned, another case has already been registered against the petitioner and except the aforesaid recovery and confessional statement of co-accused, there is nothing against the petitioner. He further submits that so far as criminal history of the petitioner is concerned, the same is nothing but only high-handedness - 2 - of the police. It is also pointed out that the trial of the petitioner has still not commenced. Considering the aforesaid submissions as well as period of detention of the petitioner in jail custody, let the petitioner be released on bail in connection with Narpatganj P.S. Case no. 89 of 2009 on furnishing bail bond of Rs 10,000-/ with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria subject to the condition that one of the sureties must be close relative of the petitioner. shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J))