Pappu Vishwakarma @ Pappu Kumar Vishwakarma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14634 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-186 Year-2020 Thana- DARBHANGA District- Darbhanga ====================================================== PAPPU VISHWAKARMA @ PAPPU KUMAR VISHWAKARMA, S/O KASHI VISHWAKARMA R/O KOTWALI CHOWK, P.S.TOWN, DISTRICT-DARBHANGA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arun Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.A.G.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 12-01-2022 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, through Video Conferencing.

This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Town Police Station Case No. 186 of 2020 (wrongly written in impugned order 136/20), disclosing offences under Sections 399, 402 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 (1-b)a, 26/35 of the Arms Act.

The police got confidential information that some miscreants are making plan to commit some occurrence. On raid, four co-accused persons were arrested with arms and ammunition. From the persons of co-accused, Praveen Kumar, a country-made pistol, Mobile set and one cartridge was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14634 of 2021(2) dt.12-01-2022 2/3 recovered. From the person of co-accused, Md. Mehraj Ansari @ Saddam a country-made rifle and mobile set and two cartridges were recovered and the third co-accused, Rahul Kumar, who is proprietor of a garage disclosed his name as Rahul Kumar. Further, a country-made pistol and two cartridges along with one mobile set was also recovered from the coaccused, Naushad. The arrested persons disclosed the name of the fifth accused who became successful in fleeing away as Pappu Vishwakarma (present petitioner). The arrested coaccused persons apprised the police party that it was the present petitioner who had called the above named miscreants in order to planning for some offences. They have also apprised the police party that the present petitioner had gone to jail for running mini gun factory.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has not been arrested at the spot and his name has been figured in the confessional statement of co-accused persons.

The arrested persons disclosed that it was the petitioner who has called them and he was already implicated for illegal running of mini gun factory. Paragraph No.3 of the bail petition shows that two other cases except the present one

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14634 of 2021(2) dt.12-01-2022 3/3 of similar nature, i.e., are against the present petitioner. In my view, it is not a fit case of anticipatory bail, accordingly, the same is hereby rejected.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey , J) sanjeev/- U T