Guddu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 54549 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-156 Year-2020 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya ====================================================== GUDDU KUMAR SON OF BABULAL MAHTO R/O VILLAGE- KHAN JAHANPUR, P.S.- BUNIYADGANJ, DISTRICT- GAYA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. S. Jamil Akhtar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 28-06-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within four weeks of resumption of normal court proceedings. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within stipulated period, office will place the matter before the Bench. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioner is that by threatening the informant, he took away the vehicle, mobile and money of the informant.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and have committed no offence. He

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 54549 of 2021(2) dt.28-06-2022 2/2 has been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation leveled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. During investigation, nothing has come against the petitioner. There is no recovery from the conscious physical possession of the petitioner. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. It is clear from the case diary that prosecution has supported its case.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner named above on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioner is rejected.

This instant application is dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) pallavi/-shikha/- U T