Dilip Kumar @ Dilip Sahni @ Chotan Sahni v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46236 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-375 Year-2005 Thana- LAKHISARAI District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== DILIP KUMAR @ DILIP SAHNI @ CHOTAN SAHNI S/O DORO SAHNI R/O VILLAGE- BALGUDAR, P.S.- LAKHISARAI, DISTRICLAKHISARAI ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Pushpa Sinha.1, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 16-10-2023
1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in connection with Lakhisarai P.S. Case No. 375 of 2005.
3. As per the First Information Report lodged in the year 2005, on 10.11.2005, the informant/police officer, while he was on patrolling duty, he received information that some criminals are stealing the iron and bricks of the alcohol factory situated at Balgudar. The informant went to the place of occurrence and saw that some unknown persons are stealing the iron and bricks of the closed factory and loading it on a boat which was anchored in the nearby river. It has been alleged that when the informant asked the said criminals about their identity,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46236 of 2023(3) dt.16-10-2023 2/2 they opened indiscriminate firing upon the informant and his team, it has further been alleged that accused persons started fleeing away from the place of occurrence while two accused persons were apprehended by the informant. They disclosed the name of the petitioner and others and the seizure list has been prepared in the presence of witnesses. After the investigation, the charge sheet has been submitted and cognizance has been taken against the petitioner and others on 14.02.2006.
4. It is after lapse of about 18 years, the petitioner has moved for the anticipatory bail. It appears that the petitioner is an absconder, cognizance has already been taken against him, accordingly, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail at the belated stage of 18 years.
5. This application is, accordingly, rejected. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) HarshPandey/- U T