Patna High CourtCR. MISC./24522/2024bail rejected

Pappu Sonar @ Pappu Kumar Verma v. The State Of Bihar

2024-07-23Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24522 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1256 Year-2022 Thana- BIHTA District- Patna ====================================================== Pappu Sonar @ Pappu Kumar Verma S/o Panna Lal Sonar R/O VILLCHAUGAIN,P.O-CHAUGAIN BAZAR,P.S-MURAR, DISTT - BUXAR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arvind Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Iftekhar Mahmood, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 392 of the IPC in connection with Bihta P.S. Case No.1256 of 2022.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case during the course of investigation based on confessional statement of apprehended accused in police custody. It is next submitted that the informant alleges that two miscreants entered his jewellery shop and committed loot and thereafter fled.

4. It is submitted that the FIR was against unknown and during the course of investigation police arrested Bhola and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24522 of 2024(2) dt.23-07-2024 2/2 Abhishek and based on their confessional statement the name of the petitioner transpired. It is next submitted that the police took Bhola and Abhishek to the shop of the petitioner for recovering the looted article from where some articles were recovered.

5. Since the name of the petitioner transpired in confessional statement of the apprehended accused based on which a raid was conducted in the shop of the petitioner from where some articles were recovered as mentioned in the impugned order, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Prakash Narayan U T