Deepak Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22697 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-254 Year-2019 Thana- SIWAN RAIL P.S. District- Saran ====================================================== DEEPAK PRASAD S/o Dashrath Prasad Gupta @ Dashrath Prasad Shah R/o Village- Daudpur Chatti, P.S.- Daudpur, District- Saran at Chapra. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dewendra Narayan Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Anita Kumari Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 30-09-2020 The present petition has been taken up for consideration through the mode of Video Conferencing in view of the prevailing situation on account of COVID-19 Pandemic.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Anita Kumari Singh, the learned A.P.P. for the State. This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Siwan Rail PS case no. 254 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 411/34 of Indian Penal Code.

The case of the prosecution in brief according to the informant is that on 07.12.2019 while she along with her daughter was travelling in a train and when the train was about to reach Siwan railway junction, the informant found that the lock of her bag had been broken, whereafter on suspicion, the informant along with her co-passenger had got up and in presence of the G.R.P./ R.P.F. personnel, the bag of the apprehended boy was searched and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22697 of 2020(2) dt.30-09-2020 2/2 ornaments were recovered from his bag and upon interrogation, the said arrested boy had disclosed the name of his associates and the petitioner happens to be one of them.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent, has been falsely implicated in the present case and is having a clean antecedent. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case merely on suspicion and disclosure made by co-accused person. Per contra, the learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and I find from the impugned order dated 20.06.2020 that the petitioner is accused in five more cases, however the same has not been disclosed by the petitioner in the present petition, in paragraph no. 3, which is mandatory, thus the same amounts to suppression of fact as also misleading this Court, hence the present petition stands dismissed. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) rinkee/- U T