Raj Kumar Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34153 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2018 Thana- MADHUBAN District- East Champaran ====================================================== Raj Kumar Sharma Ram Lochan Sharma Dulamr/O Vill- , Dulama P.S Madhuban Dis East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhannjay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 19-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail The anticipatory bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 28.11.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 41606 of 2022.

3. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Madhuban P.S. Case No. 117 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner along with other co-accused persons are said to have forcibly kidnapped the daughter of the informant.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34153 of 2024(2) dt.19-07-2024 2/2 the occurrence is of year, 2018 and the present anticipatory bail application has been filed in 2024. He further submits that the some of the co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.12.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 21352 of 2021. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the fact that there is delay in filing the present anticipatory bail application, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

8. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail, the learned Court below would pass order on the same day in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T