Shailesh Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38960 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-782 Year-2022 Thana- MASAUDHI District- Patna ====================================================== SHAILESH PASWAN SON OF LATE YADDUNANDAN PASWAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - LAHSUNA, PS- MASAURHI, DISTT- PATNA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ram Sandesh Roy, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 07-11-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Masaurhi P.S. Case No. 782 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 341, 323, 504 & 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned A.C.J.M., Masaurhi, Patna.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that after receiving consideration money he has not registered the land in question in favour of the informant.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to mala fide intention to save his (informant) skin from the cases lodged against him. It is further

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38960 of 2023(5) dt.07-11-2023 2/2 submitted that when the petitioner approached the police authority to lodge the case against the informant, the Police did not lodge the case against him and the case was lodged against the informant after lodging of the present case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that after going through the case diary it appears that there is ample evidence against this petitioner, hence he does not deserve anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case as well as the fact that there is ample evidence against the petitioner in the case diary, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail, the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

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