Patna High CourtCR. MISC./38433/2024disposed

Lallu Mahto @ Lallu Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

2024-07-03Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38433 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-300 Year-2023 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.

Lallu Mahto @ Lallu Sahni S/o Ballam Sahni R/o vill - Banstal, Kachhi Dargah, P.S. - Nadi Deedarganj, Distt. - Patna 2.

Ravi Sahni S/o Mangal Sahni R/o vill - Banstal, Kachhi Dargah, P.S. - Nadi Deedarganj, Distt. - Patna 3.

Hira Sahni S/o Mangal Sahni R/o vill - Banstal, Kachhi Dargah, P.S. - Nadi Deedarganj, Distt. - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioners :

Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-07-2024 Heard learned counsels for the parties.

2. At the outset, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners seeks permission to withdrawn the anticipatory bail application on behalf of Petitioner No. 2, namely Ravi Sahni.

3. Permission, as prayed for, is accorded.

4. Accordingly, anticipatory bail application on behalf of Petitioner No. 2 stands dismissed as withdrawn.

5. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 3 apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38433 of 2024(3) dt.03-07-2024 2/2

6. As per prosecution case, allegation against these petitioners is of committing theft of cable wire.

7. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case only on suspicion. No stolen article has been recovered from conscious possession of these petitioners.

8. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners and submitted that these petitioners have also got one criminal antecedent of similar nature.

9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and criminal antecedent of the petitioners of similar nature, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to Petitioner Nos. 1 and 3 is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T