Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37840/2022dismissed

Gaurab Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2022-09-29Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37840 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-227 Year-2022 Thana- GRIYAK District- Nalanda ====================================================== GAURAB KUMAR S/o Umesh Prasad R/o village- Alinagar, P.S.- Sare, District- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar No.1, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Suresh Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 29-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defects within four weeks.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable u/s 385, 387, 341, 323, 325, 34 IPC. Allegedly, the vehicle of informant was stolen away by some miscreants but during search the vehicle in damaged condition was recovered and one accused was caught who disclosed the name of his associates including the petitioner. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to village politics. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37840 of 2022(2) dt.29-09-2022 2/2 place. The allegation leveled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. His name transpired in the case on the statement of apprehended accused. Petitioner has one criminal antecedent.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that petitioner and others are involved in committing robbery from innocent people.

Considering the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner named above. The prayer for bail is rejected.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) pallavi/- U T