Chhotu @ Ravi Ranjan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22461 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2014 Thana- GURUA District- Gaya ====================================================== CHHOTU @ RAVI RANJAN Son of- Awadesh Singh @ Awadesh Prasad Resident of village-Birpur, P.S.- Ghoshi, District- Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ashok Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Syed Ehteshamuddin, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 16-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner in the present case is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Gurua P.S. Case No. 35 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner has transpired in the confessional statement of the co-accused, however, nothing has been recovered from his possession. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail as according to him the anticipatory bail is fit to be rejected on the ground that the petitioner has moved this Court after five years from the date of lodgment of the first

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22461 of 2019(4) dt.16-07-2019 2/2 information report and when the name of the petitioner has already surfaced in the confessional statement of co-accused. This Court is not willing to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioner considering that the case is of the year 2014 and chargesheet has already been filed under Section 395 IPC against other co-accused whereas the petitioner is absconding and it has come in the case diary that order for attachment of his property has already been issued. The prayer for anticipatory bail is, thus, refused.

In case the petitioner surrenders in the court below within a period of four weeks from today and prays for regular bail, his prayer will be considered by the court below on the basis of the materials available on the record. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) avin/- U T