Raju Pathak @ Rajeev Ranjan Pathak v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22504 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2022 Thana- DUMARIAGHAT District- East Champaran ====================================================== RAJU PATHAK @ RAJEEV RANJAN PATHAK Son of Kamalkant Pathak Resident of Village and P.O.- Dumariya, P.S.- Dumariyaghat, District - East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Abhishek Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Abhay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 24-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects, as pointed out by the office, within four weeks. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Dumariaghat P.S. Case No. 12 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 414, 420, 467, 468 & 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code, later on Section 120B IPC was added pending in the Court of learned A.C.J.M.-I, East Champaran at Motihari.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22504 of 2022(2) dt.24-08-2022 2/2 250 kgs of stolen sugar is said to have been recovered from the house of the petitioner.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to police mechanism and maneuverings. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that considering the nature of allegation, the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail. Considering the facts and circumstances of case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T