Patna High CourtCR. MISC./11645/2018rejected

Dinesh Kumar @ Dinesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2018-02-27Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11645 of 2018 (2) dt.27-02-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.11645 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -550 Year- 2017 Thana -FATUHA District- PATNA ====================================================== Dinesh Kumar @ Dinesh Yadav aged about 22 years son of Doman Yadav resident of village-Janardanpur, P.S. Fatuha, District-Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 27-02-2018 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Fatuha P.S. Case No.550 of 2017 registered under Sections 399, 402 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1-b)a and 26/35 of the Arms Act.

The informant alleged that on 02.12.2017, he received secret information that some miscreants are assembled at Dhoba bridge of Fatuha-Daniyavan road and they were trying to commit cognizable offence. The informant and other police officer went there but the accused persons started fleeing away. One, Ramanand Yadav apprehended and from whose possession, arms and ammunition were recovered. Ramanand Yadav disclosed the name of other accused persons.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11645 of 2018 (2) dt.27-02-2018 petitioner is co-villager of Ramanand Yadav. Petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case. The petitioner was working as canteen boy in the canteen of N.M.C.H.

It appears that the apprehended accused Ramanand Yadav from whose possession arms and ammunition were recovered disclosed the name of the petitioner and others and also disclosed that they had assembled to commit robbery/dacoity. Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Saurabh/- U T