Anil Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24822 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-205 Year-2023 Thana- DIGHWARA District- Saran ====================================================== Anil Kumar Singh son of Baliram Singh Resident of Village- Puchariya, P.S.- Sangrampur, Dist.- Motihari ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Abhishek Ranjan, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 25-04-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Dighwara P.S. Case No. 205 of 2023 dated 15.06.2023 registered for the offences punishable u/s 407, 379 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, on 02.06.2023, the informant Gorakh Sharma hired a truck for transportation of iron scrap from the petitioner namely Anil Kumar Singh who is a transporter. The petitioner purchased iron scrap from Birendra Singh and Md.Munna which was worth Rs. 6 lakhs. It is further alleged that the said truck was called at Dhram Kanta for weighing the iron scrap then the driver of the truck demanded
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24822 of 2024(2) dt.25-04-2024 2/3 money from the informant for expenses. The informant went to his home for bringing money, but then, he reached at Dharam Kanta and he found that the said truck was not there upon which he called the driver as well as transported but he could not get any clue.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of the vehicle in question and nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated at para 3 of the bail petition.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as there is no specific overt act against the petitioner, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, ACJM-II, Saran at Chhapra in connection with Dighwara P.S. Case No. 205 of 2023, subject to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24822 of 2024(2) dt.25-04-2024 3/3 conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
7. The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable because, the bail bond of the petitioner is liable to cancelled.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) annpurna/- U T