Pranjal Kumar @ Laddu Manjhi @ Laddu Kumar Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14719 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-185 Year-2021 Thana- BARHARIA District- Siwan ====================================================== Pranjal Kumar @ Laddu Manjhi @ Laddu Kumar Manjhi Son of Ram Shankar Manhi Resident of Village Salempur, P.S. Mhadeva, District Siwan (Bihar).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Alok Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 11-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Barhria P.S. Case No.185 of 2021, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 413, 414 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner along with other co-accused persons were selling the stolen motorcycles and the petitioner is said to have fled away from the place of occurrence after seeing the police.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that no incriminating article

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14719 of 2022(2) dt.11-08-2022 2/2 has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner is made accused in the present case on the basis of confessional statement of the apprehended accused. It is also submitted that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph-3 of the bail application.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is also a member of the syndicate involved in selling and purchasing of stolen motorcycles.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

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