Nagendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.380 of 2017 (04) dt.12-04-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.380 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -410 Year- 2016 Thana -PHULWARI District- PATNA ====================================================== Nagendra Kumar, son of Chandeshwar Roy, resident of village-Nagawa (Derapar), P.S.-Janipur, District-Patna.

.... .... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur-Advocate Mr. Amit Kumar-Advocate For the State : Mr. Binay Krishna-S.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER 12-04-2017 Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned Special Public Prosecutor.

Appellant has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Phulwarisharif (Janipur) P. S. Case No.410 of 2016, which has been registered under Sections 494, 498A, 341, 323, 306 of the I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) of the S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Without adverting to merit of the case, it is manifest from the written report that appellant has not been named as an accused nor his presence is found in the column of an accused under formal F.I.R. Supplementary affidavit has been filed wherein at Para-2, it has been incorporated that on 19.09.2016, police had prayed for issuance of warrant of arrest against the appellant, but the order sheet so annexed with the supplementary affidavit up-till 15.10.2016, did not suggest that learned lower

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.380 of 2017 (04) dt.12-04-2017 Court had acceded with the prayer of the I.O. by way of issuing warrant of arrest non-bailable identifying the appellant to be an accused.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that police is chasing the appellant and raided his house even at odd hour putting the life of the appellant at stake. Learned counsel for the appellant stressed upon the order dated 22.09.2016, by which the learned lower Court took cognizance of an offence whereunder a casual remark has been made over keeping the investigation pending against the appellant and others, that is not going to improve the status of the appellant in the background of the fact that up-till-now he has not been made an accused in strict legal sense. Consequent thereupon, it has become crystal clear that his status as an accused has not yet been confirmed. On account thereof, instant appeal happens to be pre-mature and is accordingly, disposed of.

Vikash/- (Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J) U T