Patna High CourtCR. MISC./16309/2023dismissed

Pappu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2023-08-07Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16309 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-85 Year-2013 Thana- MASAUDHI District- Patna ====================================================== Pappu Kumar S/O Late Rajendra Prasad R/O Village- Gularia Bigha, P.SOkhary, Distt.- Jehanabad At Present Resinding At Village- Kazichak, P.SMasaurhi, Distt.- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Iftekhar Mahmood ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 07-08-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Masaurhi P.S. Case No. 85 of 2013 registered for the offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the Court of learned ADJ, Masaurhi.

3. As per the prosecution case, allegation against the petitioner is that he had committed murder of his father.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that there is no eye witness to the occurrence. Informant came to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16309 of 2023(4) dt.07-08-2023 2/2 the place after the said occurrence was over. Admittedly she is not an eye witness and has lodged the FIR on heresay. He further submits that the petitioner is the son of the deceased and the informant is his cousin sister who wants to grab the property. The petitioner has got one criminal antecedent in which he was acquitted by the Court below.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the process under Section 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. has been completed on 17.08.2022, itself. Hence, he does not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

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