Patna High CourtCR. MISC./15310/2020rejected

Jitendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2020-10-09Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15310 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2019 Thana- SANDESH District- Bhojpur ====================================================== JITENDRA KUMAR S/O Butan Yadav @ Binod Yadav @ Binod singh Resident of Village - Bardiha, P.S. - Sandesh, District - Bhojpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajani Ranjan Pd. Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar Singh No. 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 09-10-2020 Heard both sides.

The matter has been taken up through video conferencing.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Sandesh P.S. case No. 9/2019 registered under Section 420, 472, 489(A) (C) (D) (E) and 120B of the IPC.

The informant on secret information of printing fake currency notes raided the house of Nagendra Yadav, resident of village Jamuaw. Five persons, namely, Nagendra Yadav, Devanti Devi, Neha Devi, Rekha Devi and Guddu Kumar were apprehended from inside the house and huge quantity of fake currency notes, computers, papers meant for printing fake currency notes were recovered from the house of Nagendra Yadav.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15310 of 2020(3) dt.09-10-2020 2/2 The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in the FIR. The name of petitioner surfaced in the case in the confessional statement of Guddu Kumar. Save and except the confession of Guddu Kumar there is no material on record. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner or from the house of the petitioner. The petitioner has got criminal antecedent but other accused persons have already been granted regular bail but it appears that petitioner was earlier made accused in Sandesh P.S. case No. 66/2018 registered u/s 392 of the IPC but he was acquitted. Later on he is also made accused in Sandesh P.S. case No. 10/2019 registered u/s 420, 472 and 489 (A)(B)(C) of the IPC. Taking into consideration the fact that petitioner has got criminal antecedent, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T