Anjana Singh @ Anjan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1666 of 2017 (3) dt.08-02-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.1666 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -184 Year- 2016 Thana -NABINAGAR District- AURANGABAD ====================================================== Anjana Singh @ Anjan Kumar Son o Shiv Nath Singh, Resident of VillageGurdi, P.S. Nabinagar, District-Aurangabad .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Anita Kumari Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 08-02-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Nabinagar P.S. Case No. 184 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 325, 307, 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly, the petitioner and other FIR named accused persons along with 4-5 unknown surrounded the motorcycle of the informant and started assaulting him with hockey stick, lati-danda and started snatching the amount of Rs. 2,65,000/- which was to re-pay the loan and on protest Lavkush Singh gave sword blow causing injury and others started assaulting with hockey sticks and lathi-danda. The petitioner snatched gold chain and the accused persons snatched the loan amount and key of bike and fled away with the motorcycle of the informant also.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1666 of 2017 (3) dt.08-02-2017 Submission is of false implication and that against the petitioner ornamental allegation has been made to have snatched the gold chain and there is no specific allegation for assaulting the informant against the petitioner and as such the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration.

Learned APP opposes the prayer of pre-arrest bail by submitting that at 4:00 p.m. the crime has been committed wherein the loan amount of Rs. 2,65,000/- has been snatched, the motorcycle of the informant has also been taken away and the petitioner snatched the gold chain of two bhar of the informant. In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T