Rambhu Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.8945 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1143 Year- 2014 Thana -MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Rambhu Thakur, son of Punaydeo Thakur, Circle Inspector, Halka No. 07, Anchal and Police Station-Mushahari, District-Muzaffarpur, Permanent Address-Village-Rajabazar, P.S.-Balua, District-Motihari. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sri Krishna Ranjan For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Umeshnand Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 28-02-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Complaint Case No. 1143 of 2014, instituted for the offence under Section(s) 420, 465 of the Indian Penal Code. There is allegation in the complaint petition that the land in question was mutated in favour of accused Nos. 1 and 2 by the Circle Officer, Mushahari on the basis of report submitted by the petitioner who was posted as Circle Inspector, Mushahari Anchal, Muzaffarpur.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that although the petitioner was posted as Circle Inspector at the relevant time but the report was not submitted by him in his own

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8945 of 2017 (2) dt.28-02-2017 2/2 handwriting.

From the impugned order, it appears that petitioner had already been declared absconder as he did not appear after issuance of process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C proceeding. There is specific allegation against this petitioner that on the report of the petitioner being Circle Inspector, the land in question, which was in the name of the father of the complainant, was mutated in favour of accused Nos. 1 and 2. In such circumstance, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail is rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below within a period of six weeks from today in connection with Complaint Case No. 1143 of 2014, Trial No. 1622 of 2016, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, and seek regular bail, which shall be considered and disposed off on its own merit without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Sanjay Priya, J) Shageer/- U T