Vikash Kumar Pandey @ Vikash Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.24454 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -17 Year- 2016 Thana -RASULPUR District- SARAN ====================================================== Vikash Kumar Pandey @ Vikash Pandey Ashok Pandey, R/o Village- Mani Chapra, P.S. Ekma, District- Saran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anant Kumar Bhaskar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 06-06-2017 Heard Sri Anant Kumar Bhaskar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail as he is apprehending arrest in Rasulpur P.S. Case No. 17/2016 registered under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case as alleged would show that one Vijay Kumar while travelling was intercepted by some miscreants who were riding on a motorcycle and then he robbed of Rs. 50,000/-. The F.I.R. is against unknown giving some description of the physique of the accused persons.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the petitioner is an accused in one more case under the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24454 of 2017 (2) dt.06-06-2017 2/3 Arms Act, he has been granted bail in the said case and so far as the present case is concerned, there is no material to implicate him in the present case. He also draws my attention towards the impugned order in which the learned Additional Sessions VIII, Saran, Chhapra has recorded that the informant himself appeared in court and accepted that he knew the accused petitioner and he was not involved in this case.

Learned A.P.P. opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not refute the assertions that the informant himself has denied the involvement of the petitioner in the present case. In the facts and circumstances of the case stated herein-above, considering the fact that the informant admits that he was known to the accused petitioner but had not named him in the F.I.R. and then has himself stated in court that the petitioner was not involved in the present case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner, namely, Vikash Kumar Pandey @ Vikash Pandey, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24454 of 2017 (2) dt.06-06-2017 3/3 Magistrate X, Saran at Chapra in Rasulpur P.S. Case No. 17/2016, subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Dilip, AR U T