Raushan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37126 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2024 Thana- LAHERIMUHALLA District- Nalanda ====================================================== Raushan Kumar Son of Sanjay Sharma Resident of village - Shakraul, P.S.- Deepnagar, District - Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pankaj Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Anurag Singh, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 26-06-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Laheri P.S. Case No. 51 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 379, 411/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66 (C), 66 (D) of the Information Technology Act.

3. Allegedly, in course of patrolling duty, one co-accused, namely, Ashish Kumar was apprehended and two ATM cards as well as cash of Rs. 20,000/- have been recovered. On query, he did not give any satisfactory answer upon the alleged recovery and later on disclosed that both the ATM cards are forged and fabricated given by the petitioner to him.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is quite innocent and he has committed no offence. No such occurrence as alleged has ever taken place. He has been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37126 of 2024(2) dt.26-06-2024 2/2 falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is totally false and based on concocted facts. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and from his house. He was not present at the place of occurrence on the alleged date and time. There is nothing on record to indicate the complicity of the petitioner barring the confessional statement of the apprehended person which has no evidentiary value in the eye of law. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the nature of offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

7. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seeks regular bail, the learned Court below shall pass order on the same day in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) divyanshi/- U T