Patna High CourtCR. MISC./10394/2020bail rejected

Dharmbir Mallik v. The State Of Bihar

2020-09-16Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10394 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-397 Year-2019 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== DHARMBIR MALLIK Son of Chandeshwar Malik Resident of VillageDyalpur Garh, P.S.-Raja Pakar, O.P. Barathi, District-Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Subodh Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 16-09-2020 Heard Mr. Subodh Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State through video conferencing Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sonepur P.S. Case No. 397 of 2019 registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the I.P.C.

The allegation against the petitioner is that when the informant was returning on motorcycle, he was intercepted by three miscreants on the point of gun, who snatched motorcycle, mobile, purse, PAN Card, A.T.M. Card etc.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and his name has transpired on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused Karan Mallick i.e. the brother of the petitioner, who disclosed that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10394 of 2020(4) dt.16-09-2020 2/2 petitioner has given the mobile in question to him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and he deserves the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Having regard to the submission made by the parties, taking into consideration the materials available on record, the nature of offence and the fact that custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be required for proper investigation in the matter, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this application is rejected.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) praful/- U T