Akshay Kumar @ Akshay Gond v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 33984 of 2020 Arising Out of PS Case No.-20 Year-2020 Thana- RAMGARH District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Akshay Kumar @ Akshay Gond, age about 21 years, Male Son of Prakash Gond, Resident of Village Karnpura, PS Durgawati, District - Kaimur at Bhabua.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Tribhuwan Narayan, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 23-03-2021 The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Tribhuwan Narayan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.

3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Ramgarh PS Case No. 20 of 2020 dated 02.02.2020, instituted under Sections 392/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The allegation against the petitioner, though not named in the FIR, is of being an accomplice in the looting of motorcycle at the point of countrymade pistol and knife and also

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33984 of 2020 dt.23-03-2021 2/2 snatching of Rs. 25,000/-, mobile phone and bag containing PAN card, Aadhaar card and some documents of the informant.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has not been identified and only on the confessional statement of co-accused Shivam Singh @ Mohit Singh before the police, his name has been introduced as an accused. It was submitted that the petitioner has been implicated due to his enemies and village politics and further that no incriminating material has been recovered from him.

6. Learned APP submitted that the petitioner carries criminal antecedent as he is accused in another case of similar nature of the year 2019. It was submitted that there is no question of any recognition as in the FIR itself it has been stated that the miscreants had covered their face with muffler.

7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U T