Patna High CourtCR. MISC./44239/2019dismissed

Bittu Kumar @ Anurag Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2019-07-18Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44239 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-489 Year-2018 Thana- BAKHTIYARPUR District- Patna ====================================================== BITTU KUMAR @ ANURAG KUMAR, S/O Jaigovind Rai @ Balgovind singh Residence of Village- Ghoshwari, P.S.- Bakhtiarpur District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pratyush Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 18-07-2019 Petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in connection with Bakhtiarpur P.S. Case No. 489 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 399, 402 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

Allegation as per written report is that police got information that accused person of case No. 316 of 2018 along with his associates are preparing for some crime raided the place of occurrence and arrested three accused persons and they disclosed the name of the petitioner. It further appears that arms and ammunition were recovered from the apprehended accused persons and they have disclosed the names of other associates, including that of the petitioner and they have also been identified by Dafadar and Chaukidar.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44239 of 2019(2) dt.18-07-2019 2/2 Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that except confessional statement there is nothing against him and though he is accused in one more case but he is on bail in that case.

Heard learned APP also, who has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail stating that not only petitioner has been made accused on the basis of confessional statement but FIR also shows Dafadar and Chaukidar have identified him and he is accused in one more case and further investigation is going on. In view of above facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He may surrender and pray for regular bail. With the above observation, this application is dismissed.

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