Patna High CourtCR. MISC./21697/2020rejected

Amarendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2020-09-03Mr. Justice Birendra Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21697 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-674 Year-2019 Thana- KANTI THARMAL POWER DistrictMuzaffarpur ====================================================== AMARENDRA KUMAR S/o Mahindra Ray Resident of Village- Rauna Kachahari, P.S.- Gaighat, District- Mazaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arun Kumar, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.A.G.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 03-09-2020 This matter has been taken up through Video Conferencing.

Heard the parties.

The petitioner is languishing in custody for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 365 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code. Later on Sections 392, 394, 411, 302, 201 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code were added. Driver of the informant went along with the vehicle hired by holder of Mobile No. 9931041376. Thereafter, driver and vehicle got missing. Later on, dead body of the driver was found whose murder was committed. During investigation, it revealed that the mobile number was wrongly informed as the same was of a Judicial Officer of the Civil Court. It further revealed that the said vehicle was purchased by this petitioner from one Raja

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21697 of 2020(3) dt.03-09-2020 2/2 Sah. The petitioner was earlier involved in business of liquor and probably for use in that business the said vehicle was purchased on a very low cost. Other co-accused confessed that some other person had taken the vehicle by committing murder of the driver.

Considering the indirect involvement of the petitioner in purchase of stolen vehicle which was facilitated by committing murder of the driver of the vehicle, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail for the present in connection with Kanti P.S. Case No. 674 of 2019. Hence, prayer for bail of the petitioner is refused. Petitioner may renew prayer for bail after framing of the charges before the court below itself who shall pass order accordingly.

(Birendra Kumar, J) mantreshwar/- U T