Pintu Kumar @ Pintu Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50137 of 2015 (4) dt.17-03-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.50137 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -74 Year- 2015 Thana -NIMCHAKBATHANI District- GAYA ====================================================== Pintu Kumar @ Pintu Kumar Yadav son of Sanjay Yadav resident of Village - Hemara, O.P. Sarbadha, P.S. - Khizarsarai, District - Gaya. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Kunwar Narayan Jamuar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-03-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Neemchak Bathani P.S. Case No. 74 of 2015 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Gaya for the offences instituted under Sections 379, 411, 413 and 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case that the informant was on patrolling duty and intercepted a motorcycle on which two persons were sitting and from the possession of Pappu Kumar a country made gun with live cartridge and misfired cartridge were recovered and said Pappu Kumar stated that he purchased the said motorcycle from Pintu Kumar and a gun was purchased from

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50137 of 2015 (4) dt.17-03-2016 unknown persons about one year before at the cost of Rs.600/-. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no recovery of any incriminating article from the possession of this petitioner. Petitioner has been named in the FIR merely on the confession of a co-accused Pappu Kumar who was apprehended on the spot. There is admitted enmity between the petitioner and the said coaccused, namely, Pappu Kumar. On behalf of the State, it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the FIR and has actively participated in the alleged occurrence.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to release the above named petitioner on anticipatory bail, the same is rejected.

Anyhow, if the petitioner surrenders in the court below within a period of four weeks, the same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order taking into account the submissions made on his behalf and, if possible, the same may be disposed of on the same day.

(Sudhir Singh, J) B.Kr./- U T