AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ambuj Nath, J
Heard the parties.
Petitioner has been made accused in connection with Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 29/2023 corresponding to G.R. No. 547/2023 for the offences registered under section 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Sri B.K. Yadav, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dumka.
On 10.04.2023 at about 3.30 pm, Informant was returning from bank after withdrawing Rs. 1.36 lakhs. When he reached near Delipathar Bahiyar Bridge, 4-5 miscreants in a Bolero intercepted him. Accused persons in Bolero looted away the money of the Informant.
Mr. Sardhu Mahto, learned A.P.P submitted that though, the petitioner is not named in the FIR, but he has been identified as a person who was driving the Bolero vehicle in T.I. Parade.
Mr. Durga Charan Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that no specific role has been assigned against the petitioner. Actually, he was just driving the vehicle and he was sitting in the vehicle at the time when the occurrence took place.
Offence of dacoity has been defined under section 391 of the Indian Penal Code, which reads as under:
“When five or more persons conjointly commit or attempt to commit a robbery, or where the whole number of persons conjointly committing or attempting to commit a robbery, and persons present and aiding such commission or attempt, amount to five or more, every person so committing, attempting or aiding, is said to commit "dacoity ".
The term ‘conjointly’ has been used while defining dacoity in the Indian Penal Code. The offence does not envisage any specific overt act by the dacoits.
Considering the fact that the petitioner has been identified as an accused who was driving the vehicle, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail stands rejected.