Ankit Kumar @ Sanjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26288 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2020 Thana- MAKHDUMPUR District- Jehanabad ====================================================== ANKIT KUMAR @ SANJEET KUMAR S/o Ram Janam Sharma Resident of Village-Neem Bigha, P.S-Main, District-Gaya.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shantanu Kumar, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 19-10-2020 As of now the Courts have not resumed normal physical hearing, the matter has been listed today for consideration through Video Conferencing.

The learned counsels are appearing and making submissions from their residence. The Court Master and Secretary are also part of this virtual court proceedings from their homes, all with the aid of audio visual technology.

Mr. Shantanu Kumar, APP is appearing for the State as it is submitted that the brief has been allotted to him by the office of Advocate General. Henceforward his name may also be printed in the cause list.

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State.

This Court would expect that the petitioner's Counsel would honour his undertaking in the instant proceedings regarding supply of requisite court fee etc. within two weeks from the date he is called upon to do so by the office. Petitioner seeks bail in Makhdumpur PS Case No. 45 of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26288 of 2020(3) dt.19-10-2020 2/2 2020 registered under Section 392 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

The allegation is that while the informant was at the bank Rs. 13,38,870/- has been looted from him in a black bag and the miscreants have also indulged in firing.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that owing to his criminal antecedent he has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned APP for the State has pointed out from the order of rejection by the court below that the petitioner has been identified by the informant-cum-victim.

Considering the aforesaid submission, facts and circumstances, this Court, for the present, is not inclined to allow the privilege of bail to the petitioner.

The prayer for bail is rejected.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) SNkumar/- U T