Kunal Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15583 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-410 Year-2022 Thana- ALOULI District- Khagaria ====================================================== Kunal Kumar Son Of Nawal Kishore Yadav R/V- Meghauna P.S- Alauli, DistKhagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 16-05-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Alauli P.S. Case No. 410 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 474, 484 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria.

As per the prosecution case, allegation against the petitioner is that he was running Maharshi Mehi Communication, Kunal C.S.C. Centre Shop at Meghauna Bazar and was preparing unauthorized and forged Aadhar Card, Pan Card and School Certificates.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15583 of 2023(2) dt.16-05-2023 2/2 that after perusal of the statement of the independent witness transpired that the petitioner is doing a work of repairing of mobile and network job in his CS Centre but no any proof found during investigation that he was doing or constructing forged document. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of the bail application. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that there is specific overt against the petitioner. Hence, he does not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the nature of the offence, 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, considering the fact that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

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