Patna High CourtCR. MISC./16745/2024dismissed

Akshay Kumar @ Akshay Kumar Ray v. The State Of Bihar

2024-03-20Mr. Justice Harish Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16745 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-131 Year-2022 Thana- AWTARNAGAR District- Saran ====================================================== Akshay Kumar @ Akshay Kumar Ray Son of Bhuteli Ray @ Ganesh Ray Resident of Village - Ismailpur Gadhwal Tola, P.S. - Garkha, District - Saran at Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nagendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-03-2024 Heard Mr. Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Awtar Nagar P.S. Case No. 131 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 392/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Three unknown miscreants are said to have snatched a cash of Rs. 1,14,447/-, one tablet and other valuables of the informant, who happens to be Manager of Bharat Financial Inclusion Limited, on the point of pistol.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that admittedly the FIR has been instituted against unknown miscreants and, during the course of investigation, the name of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16745 of 2024(2) dt.20-03-2024 2/2 the petitioner sprung up on the confessional statement of co-accused persons and barring the confessional statement, there is no material suggesting the complicity of the petitioner in the present crime. Neither any incriminating material nor any looted article has been recovered from the whereabouts of the petitioner. He further submits that the name of the petitioner has been implicated in this case due to his previous criminal antecedents.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State, opposes the bail application and submits that the petitioner is carrying three criminal antecedents of identical nature.

6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the long list of criminal antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not acceded to the prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, his prayer is rejected.

(Harish Kumar, J) rohit/- U T