Arvind Kumar @ Baua Laua v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4567 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-267 Year-2022 Thana- KHODAWANDPUR District- Begusarai ====================================================== ARVIND KUMAR @ BAUA LAUA Son of Lalan Paswan Resident of Village- Ward No.-89, Khodawandpur, P.S.- Khodawandpur, DistrictBegusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bipin Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 10-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Khodawandpur P.S. Case No. 267 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25 (1-b) a/26 (I), 35 of the Arms Act pending in the Court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Manjhaul.

Allegation against the petitioner is that, after seeing the police he along with other persons started fleeing away from the place of occurrence. When they were chased, one person, Ramanand Kumar was arrested and upon interrogation, he disclosed the name of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. He submits that the name of the petitioner was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4567 of 2023(2) dt.10-02-2023 2/2 disclosed by the co-accused namely, Ramanand Kumar with malafide intention to harass him. He further submits that there is no criminal antecedent against the petitioner as mentioned in para 3 of this application.

Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that specific overt act has been attributed against the petitioner. He further submits that one country-made pistol and live cartridge has been recovered from one of the associates. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the fact that there is incriminating material against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned Court below would pass order on the same day in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

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