Sanny Kumar @ Sunny @ Sumit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11553 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-600 Year-2023 Thana- LAKHISARAI District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Sanny Kumar @ Sunny @ Sumit Kumar S/o Mohan Prasad Gupta R/o Vill - Kabaiya Road, Ward No. 32, P.S. and Dist. - Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mayank Bilochan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Amitesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 12-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Lakhisarai P.S. Case No. 600 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Section 401 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 (1-b)A, 25 (1-AC), 26 (i), 35 of the Arms Act and 4, 5 of the Explosive Substance Act pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhisarai.

3. The petitioner is said to be one of the allies of the primie accused, Govinda, who hatched a conspiracy of murder of Abhishek Patel in the court premises at Lakhisarai and for the same the work was assigned to Naga and Bulbul Kumar.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11553 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024 2/2 implicated in this case due to ulterior motive and suspicion. The petitioner has been made accused in this case on the confessional statement of co-accused, Govinda Kumar. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner has two criminal antecedents as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that considering the nature of the offence, 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 on the same day in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T