Patna High CourtCR. MISC./36277/2019dismissed

Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Mukhiya v. The State Of Bihar

2019-09-16Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36277 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2019 Thana- GOVINDPUR District- Nawada ====================================================== ROHIT KUMAR @ ROHIT MUKHIYA Son of Girdhari Prasad Resident of Village/Mohalla-Sarmaspur, P.S.-Rajauli, District-Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pramod Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajit Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 16-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Govindpur P.S.Case No.19/2019 registered for offences punishable under Section 383 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation as per FIR is that demand of extortion was made from the informant by several mobile numbers, of which C.D. was prepared and the caller has disclosed his name as Dharamveer of P.L.F.I., as such the FIR has been lodged. It further appears that during investigation, name of the petitioner transpired in the confessional statement of the co-accused. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in confessional statement of the co-accused, there is nothing against the petitioner and he has falsely been implicated in this case.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36277 of 2019(4) dt.16-09-2019 2/2 Heard learned A.P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant, who has opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that on the confessional statement, rented house of the petitioner was raided and one mobile used in the occurrence has been recovered from his house, as such he does not deserve anticipatory bail and the prayer of the another co-accused has been rejected by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.. Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. With the aforesaid direction, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U T