Rahul Kumar Singh @ Anupam Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23865 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-474 Year-2019 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== Rahul Kumar Singh @ Anupam Kumar S/o Lalan Prasad Singh, Resident of Village- Sanchipatti, Ward No.-7, P.S.- Hajipur Town, Distt- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Choubey Jawahar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 16-12-2020 Heard Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Chaubey Jawahar, learned counsel for the State through Video Conferencing.

In this case, the petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 474 of 2019 registered for offence punishable under sections 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per FIR, in dead of night, some miscreants entered into the house of the informant, looted the materials, including ornaments and threatened their life in the event of raising alarm. When they were coming out from the house, registration number of motor cycles were recorded by the informant, at the same time, they raised alarm, but neighbour did not come forward to help them whereafter, the informant gave call to his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23865 of 2020(4) dt.16-12-2020 2/2 son and from there, the police was informed and when the police reached at Rangila Chowk, they saw the accused persons were trying to flee away on seeing them. All the accused persons succeeded to flee away except two accused, namely, Prince @ Sarfaraj and Rohit Kumar Singh @ Anupam Kumar (petitioner) who met with an accident while fleeing away and they were arrested by the police and from the motor cycle, huge looted material has been recovered.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that till date, T.I.P. has not been conducted, but one thing is there, the petitioner has been arrested with the looted materials, at the same time, the petitioner has criminal history. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and accordingly his prayer for bail is rejected with a direction to the court below to expedite the trial.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) Mahesh/- U T