Shanu Kumar @ Sanu Kumar @ Sanu Singh @ Sanny v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.80148 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2018 Thana- PIPRAHI District- Sheohar ====================================================== Shanu Kumar @ Sanu Kumar @ Sanu Singh @ Sanny, Son of Uma Shankar Singh, Resident of Village + P.O.- Sarahanchia, P.S.- Aurai, DistrictMuzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arvind Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Smt. Veena Kumari Jaiswal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 16-01-2019 Heard both sides.

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in Piprahi P.S. Case No.82 of 2018 registered under Sections 216A, 307, 353, 395 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code, under Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act, under Sections 30(a) and 47 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 as well as under Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substance Act.

The informant alleged that Delhi police had come in connection with investigation in Timarpur P.S. Case No.113 of 2018 and to recover the victim. On the basis of the information given by Delhi police, the informant and other police officials went to the house of Dilip Mandal for recovery of the kidnapped girl. When they reached near Kuama chowk, the informant got confidential information that many criminals had assembled at the house of Chhotu Singh. On such, a raid was conducted but the accused persons started indiscriminate firing and managed to flee away from

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.80148 of 2018(2) dt.16-01-2019 2/2 the place of occurrence. The informant identified the criminals and thereafter seized vehicles.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. Name of the petitioner figured in the case in the confessional statement of Ganesh Singh. The father of the petitioner has given informatory petition against the officer of the Aurai police station and on account of such enmity, the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case but it appears from the FIR itself that many criminals had assembled at the house of Chhotu Singh and when on such information, the police went to raid the house, the accused persons, who had come on different vehicles, made indiscriminate firing and also exploded bomb. Thereafter they managed to flee away from there. The co-accused also disclosed the name of the petitioner as one of the persons who had come and made indiscriminate firing on the police force.

Considering the nature of allegations made against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) S.KUMAR/- U