Pintu @ Jai Prakash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.53394 of 2016 (4) dt.27-02-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.53394 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -46 Year- 2014 Thana -PUNPUN District- PATNA ====================================================== Pintu @ Jai Prakash Kumar, Son of Surendra Kumar Singh, resident of Village- Bauk, P.S.- Punpun, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Indeshwari Prasad Mandal, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ajay Kumar -2, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 27-02-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Punpun P.S. Case No. 46 of 2014, registered under Sections 468, 471, 420 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of J.M. Ist Class, Masaurhi.

The accusation is that warrant of arrest was issued against Surendra Kumar Singh, convicted of Criminal Appeal No. 152 of 1982, after disposal of said appeal by the Hon'ble High Court, Allahabad by the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gajipur (U.P.). Mahendra Singh, Sub-Inspector of Punpun Police Station in collusion with the family members of Suresh Kumar Singh returned the warrant unexecuted with report that he has

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.53394 of 2016 (4) dt.27-02-2017 died.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner being the son of convict, Surendra Kumar Singh has falsely been implicated in this case mere on suspicion. Learned A.P.P. submits that it has come in paragraphs 8 to 13 of the case diary that this petitioner had given information to the Sub-Inspector of Punpun Police Station at the time of execution of warrant that his father, Surendra Kumar Singh, has died.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T