Himanshu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38540 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-713 Year-2021 Thana- SUPAUL District- Supaul ====================================================== HIMANSHU KUMAR Son of Late Avadhesh Prasad Singh Resident of Village - Arraha, Ward No.- 4, P.S.- Gheladh, District - Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Prabhakar Nath Rai, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 17-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defect (s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly, three miscreants covering their faces and having deadly weapons in their hands entered the Flipkart office situated at Gaurabagh. At the point of pistol, they committed robbery and took away 29 mobiles of different company including total cash of 11,93,268/-.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38540 of 2022(3) dt.17-02-2023 2/2 petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. No such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to dirty politics. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner or from his house. His name has been transpired in this case on the basis of the confessional statement of the apprehended co-accused from whom the stolen mobile was recovered. Petitioner has one criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the offence as well as material available in the case diary, I am not inclined to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

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