Utsav Priyadarshi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.38544 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -220 Year- 2012 Thana -RUNISAIDPUR District- SITAMARHI ====================================================== Utsav Priyadarshi Son of Shri Amresh Kumar, Resident of village - Budhnagra Jagarnath, Police Station Mushhari, District Muzaffarpur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satyadev Prasad Singh Yadav, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-12-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in Runni Saidpur (Sitamarhi) P.S. case No.220 of 2012 registered under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, pending before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the alleged date and time of occurrence the informant was returning his home with family on vehicle and when he reached near Garha petrol pump, four miscreants on two motorcycles stopped his vehicle and snatched his mobile and mobile of his wife and I.card, debit card, driving licence, lap top etc. The miscreants also snatched his vehicle and fled away.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38544 of 2016 (5) dt.13-12-2016 2/2 It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that there is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. There is no other substantive evidence to suggest his implication in the present case.

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner's name has come in course of investigation and four other cases are pending against him.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. Anyhow if the petitioner surrenders in the court below within a period of six weeks from today, the same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Narendra/- U T