← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./45475/2021bail rejected

Bhawani Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2022-04-18Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45475 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2018 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== BHAWANI SINGH S/o Bhabhuti Singh Resident of Village - Tiar, P.S. Tiar, Dist. - Bhojpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mira Kumari For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Meena Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 18-04-2022 The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within one month.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 392 of the Indian Penal Code, registered in connection with Bidupur P.S.Case No.190 of 2018. As per allegation, two miscreants by a motor-cycle dashed the motor-cycle of the informant and took away his mobile phone and some cash and a golden chain. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that during investigation, it emerged from the C.D.R. that there

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45475 of 2021(2) dt.18-04-2022 2/2 was some conversation from the SIM of the informant which was taken away by the miscreants. He has submitted further that the petitioner had purchased a mobile set and receipt whereof has been annexed.

The learned court below has mentioned that in paragraph nos. 78 and 81 of the case diary the name of the present petitioner has surfaced on the basis of the C.D.R. of mobile number. The petitioner has produced papers to show that he purchased the mobile set, but how he got the SIM has not been clarified.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail. His prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected. Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioner within the stipulated time as provided hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) HR/- U T