Sonu @ Sonu Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3893 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2018 Thana- PRANPUR District- Katihar ====================================================== SONU @ SONU KUMAR SINGH S/O RAMANAND SINGH Resident of village- Narayanpur, Pagalbari, P.S.- Manihari, District- Katihar. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Md. Musowir For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Braj Kishore Pd.(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 04-05-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Pranpur P.S. Case No. 101 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 392 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned C.J.M., Katihar. As per the prosecution case, when the informant was coming to Katihar by his motorcycle, in the way, four miscreants intercepted him and looted away the cash of Rs. 1,90, 460/-, one Tab, mobile, Pan Card, ATM Card etc. Which were kept inside the dickey of the said motorcyle. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case.The allegation levelled against the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3893 of 2023(2) dt.04-05-2023 2/2 petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R., on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Md. Tanvir the name of the petitioner has come in the present case. The petitioner has got two criminal antecedents as mentioned in para-3 of the bail application.
Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the petitioner is also involved in the present case. Hence, he does not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the fact that the petitioner has got one criminal antecedent of similar nature of offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.
The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T