Rangdarwa @ Rangdar Yadav @ Rangbaz Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.11017 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -143 Year- 2014 Thana -JAHANABAD District- JEHANABAD ====================================================== Rangdarwa @ Rangdar Yadav @ Rangbaz Yadav Son of Bodi Yadav @ Shivnath Yadav, Resident of Village- Teni Bigha, P.S.- Jehanabad, DistrictJehanabad. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Lakshmi Kant Sharma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 08-04-2017 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P. for the State.

In this application for anticipatory bail the petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 143 of 2014 for the offences punishable under sections 379 and 420 of the I.P.C.

Allegedly, the petitioner being driver of the tempo brought the informant and his family members from Jehanabad Station to Musahari Tola Kako and at the time of unloading the tempo the petitioner fled away with the attaché of the informant containing cash of Rs. 16,000/-, two mobiles, five saris, four suits and other articles. The informant stated that the driver was being

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11017 of 2017 (3) dt.08-04-2017 2/2 called as Rangdarwa by other person at Jehanabad Station. During investigation the tempo driver Vikash Kumar, vide paragraph- 20 of the case diary, also stated regarding involvement of the petitioner in the crime.

Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner has been made victim of the circumstances, he has got no criminal antecedent, nothing has been recovered from his house and without proper investigation charge sheet has been submitted against the petitioner and as such the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration.

The learned A.P.P. opposes prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner by pointing out that the witness Vikash Kumar, who is also a tempo driver, has stated regarding involvement of the petitioner in paragraph-20 of the case diary. In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant privilege of pre-arrest bail to him and accordingly his such prayer stands rejected in connection with the aforementioned case pending in the court of Sri Pranav Kumar Bharti, J.M. 1st Class, Jehanabad.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T