Raghubir Kumar @ Raghubir Kumar Rout v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.54748 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2018 Thana- LAHERIYASARAI District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Raghubir Kumar @ Raghubir Kumar Rout S/o Shiv Prasad Rout, Resident of Mohalla - Khajasarai, P.S. Laheriasarai, District - Darbhanga. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Murari Nr. Choudhary, Advocate.

For the State : Mr. S.N. Rahman, APP For the Opposite Party:

Mr. Kaushalesh Choudhary, Advocate.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 24-01-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 420, 504, 506, 354 'A', 354 'D' (ii) and 327 of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Laheriasarai P.S. Case No. 75 of 2018.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated as he is a young person of about 18 years of age working at Delhi and he has no concern with the alleged occurrence. It is submitted that the F.I.R. has been instituted out of enmity and for political reasons. It is submitted that none of the mobile numbers allegedly used were in the name of the petitioner.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54748 of 2018(6) dt.24-01-2019 2/2

4. Learned APP assisted by learned counsel for the informant appearing suo motu oppose the petition for grant of anticipatory bail. It is pointed out from paragraph-36 of the case diary that some of the mobile numbers belong to the petitioner, his mother and another relative. Learned counsel for the informant submits that after the present occurrence, the petitioner has made a forced entry into the house of the informant and set it on fire, in respect of which Laheriasarai P.S. Case No. 99 of 2018 had been instituted.

5. Having regard to the nature of accusations, gravity of the offence alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed. It is made clear that if the petitioner surrenders and seeks for regular bail before the Court below, the same shall be considered and disposed of on its own merits.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar/BT U T