Pitamber Pandey v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.47341 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2 Year- 2014 Thana -DUMRIAGHAT DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ======================================================
1. Pitamber Pandey son of late Sudhiste Pandey Resident of village - Rampur Khajuria, P.S. - Dumariya Ghat, District - East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar No.Iii For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Rabindra Kumar (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 02-07-2015 Heard the Counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Dumariaghat P.S. Case No. 2 of 2014 registered under sections 413, 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
According to the prosecution case, the petitioner was hand in glove with the accuseds who were involved in committing theft of tractor and disposal thereof. On the confession of the Sushil Kumar Singh, three tractors were recovered at the sahan of the house of the petitioner when the house of the petitioner was searched. Six persons were apprehended by the police but the petitioner fled away. The allegation is that those tractors were stolen one and, as such, the petitioner clearly involved in the commission of the crime.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47341 of 2014 (5) dt.02-07-2015 2/2 Contention of the petitioner is that the two tractors belong to some other person and was/were lying at the Sahan. He has no criminal antecedent.
Learned APP, on the other hand, after going through the case diary, states that during the investigation, several witnesses have supported the prosecution case. This Court finds from the impugned order reference of several paragraphs of the case diary wherein incriminating materials were found against the petitioner.
Taking into account the aforesaid, I am not satisfied that the petitioner deserves privilege of anticipatory bail. Prayer is rejected. Petitioner may surrender and seek bail. (Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Pankaj/- U T