Laxman Tanti @ Laxman Das @ Laxan Tanti @ Laxan Das v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5840 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2023 Thana- PIPRA District- Supaul ====================================================== Laxman Tanti @ Laxman Das @ Laxan Tanti @ Laxan Das Son of Late Prem Tanti R/o vill - Tetrahi, ward no. 3, Tetrahi Kothi, P.s. - Pipra, Distt. - Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Santosh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 22-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Pipra P.S. Case No. 79 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363 & 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned A.D.J.-VI-cum-Special Judge, POSCO, Supaul.

3. The petitioner in association of other co-accused is said to have kidnapped the minor son and daughter of the informant.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the victim was taken for medical examination without recording the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which creates suspicion about the prosecution case. The allegation levelled against the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5840 of 2024(2) dt.22-02-2024 2/2 petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has supported the prosecution case. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail, the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T