Sonu Samrat @ Sonu Kumar @ Rupak Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30657 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-153 Year-2020 Thana- KHAJANCHI HAT District- Purnia ====================================================== Sonu Samrat @ Sonu Kumar @ Rupak Kumar Son of Mithilesh Prasad Yadav R/O Village - Maranga Ward No. 8, P.S. - Maranga, District - Purnea. ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate Ms. Bidhu Ranjan, ADvocate For the State :
Mr. J.K. Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 12-02-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner hereby undertakes to remove all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter as and when required. It is accordingly directed that all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter be removed within one month hereof.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with K. Hat (Sahayak) P.S. Case No. 153 of 2020.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in connection with alleged theft of some idols from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30657 of 2020(3) dt.12-02-2021 2/3 Shree Ram Janki Gokul Singh Thakurwari, Tatma Toli, Purnea. It is submitted that the F.I.R. has been instituted against unknown and the petitioner's name has transpired in course of investigation on the extra judicial confessional statement of three miscreants apprehended in the case. It is submitted that recovery of idols has been made from Bambam Thakur, Bipin Yadav and Ajay Kumar.
4. Learned APP, on the other hand, invites reference to the impugned order, taking note that in their self inculpatory statement, the three miscreants have narrated the petitioner's role in the theft. The calls details (CDR) discloses conversations between the other miscreants and the petitioner. The petitioner is accused in one other case of theft as detailed in paragraph-3 of the petition.
5. Having regard to the nature of accusations and the gravity of the offences alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The petition stands dismissed.
6. If the petitioner surrenders and seeks regular bail before the learned Court below the same shall be considered on its own merit in accordance with law, without being prejudiced by any observation in the present order.
7. Office shall follow-up to ensure that all defects are removed and compliance with the notices of this Court are made
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30657 of 2020(3) dt.12-02-2021 3/3 by the petitioner within the stipulated time provided in para-1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.
(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar//- U T