Patna High CourtCR. MISC./39023/2023dismissed

Bittu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2023-09-06Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39023 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2023 Thana- JAMHOR District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Bittu Kumar, Son of Gopal Prasad Sao @ Gopal Sao, Resident of Village - Deohara, P.S.- Goh, District - Aurangabad.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 06-09-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner in the present case is seeking prearrest bail in connection with Jamhore P.S. Case No. 25 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 394 of the Indian Penal Code. He has got no criminal antecedent.

3. As per the prosecution story, on 16.02.2023 when the brother of the informant was returning from Agra Cantt in the train, the accused persons before Anugra Narayan Road, Railway Station, jumped from moving train at Village-Timat Bigha with the brother of the informant and snatched all his belongings and killed him.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that the petitioner has no criminal

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39023 of 2023(3) dt.06-09-2023 2/2 antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Having regard to the materials placed before this Court from the case diary that both the accused who were arrested have made a statement about the manner of killing of the victim and then they have stated that they looted gold which is lying with this petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is, thus, refused.

8. In case the petitioner surrenders and prays for regular bail within four weeks from today in the court below, his prayer for regular bail shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudice by the order of this Court.

9. This application stands disposed of.

10. Let the case diary be returned to the court below. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) SUSHMA2/- U T