Vijay Kumar Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26471 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2020 Thana- HAJIPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Vijay Kumar Thakur S/o Ramnandan Thakur R/o Village and P.O.- Ghosrama, P.S.- Piyar, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Satyki Kumar S/o- Late Ram Nandan Singh R/o Village and P.O.- Ayodhya, P.S.- Teghra, District- Begusarai ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Paswan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bisheshwar Ram, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Nachiketa Jha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 03-12-2020 Heard Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Paswan, for the petitioner, Mr. Nachiketa Jha for the informant and Mr. Bisheshwar Ram for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in connection with Hajipur Town P.S. Case No. 46 of 2020 dated 17.01.2020 instituted for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 409, 407, 468 and 471/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

It has been urged on behalf of the petitioner that the entire accusation of misappropriating Khadi clothes and of locking the godown is attributed to Rangam Kumar and the petitioner and another are only said to have conspired with aforesaid Rangam Kumar to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26471 of 2020(3) dt.03-12-2020 2/2 commit this crime. It has further been submitted that the complaint was lodged a long time ago but the FIR was registered after much delay.

Learned counsel for the informant, however, has pointed out that one of the accused persons of this case is in jail and, therefore, the petitioner ought not to be granted anticipatory bail as it would reflect that two persons with similar allegation have been treated differently.

Regard being had to the nature of accusation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to him.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

The interim order dated 21.10.2020 is hereby withdrawn/vacated.

However, if the petitioner surrenders before the court below and seeks bail, the court below shall take into account all the necessary facts and shall pass orders in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the fact that the present petition has not been entertained.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) krishna/- U T