Patna High CourtCR. MISC./26159/2017dismissed

Anil Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2017-07-01Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.26159 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -81 Year- 2017 Thana -MAHUA District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) =========================================================== Anil Kumar Singh, son of Kameshwar Singh @ Kamleshwar Singh, R/o VillageGorjaul Dhab, P.S.- Mahua, Distt.- Vaishali. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 01-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 81 of 2017 dated 30.03.2017 instituted under Sections 414/506 of the Indian Penal Code and 25 (1-B)a/26/35 of the Arms Act.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was riding along with another person on a motorcycle and when asked to stop by the informant, both two persons threatened him by flashing pistol and when the informant raised cry one person fled away and the other person who was caught at the spot disclosed the name of the petitioner.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26159 of 2017 dt.01-07-2017 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has wrongly been named as he has no role or connection with the incident and only because there was some altercation on the date of occurrence between the petitioner and the person who has been caught he has also been implicated.

5. Learned A.P.P. submitted that two persons were riding on the motorcycle and one person fled away and the petitioner is the person named by the person who has been caught clearly reveals that there has been no false implication.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

7. The application, accordingly, stands dismissed. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Anjani/- AFR/NAFR U T