Chhotu @ Chhote Lal Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37762 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2024 Thana- BAHADURPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Chhotu @ Chhote Lal Sahani Son of Rama Sahani Resident of VillageSandalpur, Post- Mahendru, P.S.- Bahadurpur, Dist.- Patna, Bihar, Pin-800006 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kumar Kishan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 10-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

02. In the present case, the petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bahadurpur P.S. Case No. 22 of 2024, registered on 13.01.2024, for the alleged offences under Sections 341, 323, 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

03. As per prosecution case, the petitioner and coaccused persons snatched money from the husband of the informant, a Bank Officer, and also assaulted him when he was paying the auto-driver after returning from his duty in the night of date of occurrence.

04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. No occurrence as alleged has ever taken place. The

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37762 of 2024(2) dt.10-07-2024 2/3 occurrence took place on 12.01.2024 at 11:45 PM whereas FIR has been registered on 13.01.2024 at 4:30 PM though the police station is just nearby and this shows the FIR has been lodged with ulterior motive. The victim has not put his signature on the written report and has not made any complaint against the petitioner. It also creates doubt over the prosecution story. Further it is not disclosed what was the amount of cash which was snatched by the petitioner and co-accused persons. The petitioner was not apprehended from the spot and only due to some personal grudge, the present case has been lodged. The petitioner is having criminal antecedent of one case and he is on bail in that case.

05. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. Learned APP submits that there is specific allegation that the petitioner and two other persons, under a conspiracy and pre-planned manner, snatched the money from the husband of the informant when he deboarded the auto and also assaulted him.

06. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and considering the specific allegation the petitioner and his associates for assault and snatching the money from the husband of the informant, I do not think it is a fit case for grant of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37762 of 2024(2) dt.10-07-2024 3/3 anticipatory bail. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) Ashish/- U T