Md. Shahnawaz Ansari @ Shahnawaz v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.54058 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-13 Year-2018 Thana- BHAGALPUR KOTWALI DistrictBhagalpur ====================================================== MD. SHAHNAWAZ ANSARI @ SHAHNAWAZ son of Late Md. Atif @ Atiwa, resident of Village- Kasba Chamar Toli Lane, Champanagar, P.S.- Nath Nagar, District- Bhagalpur.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar Singh -5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 28-09-2018 Heard leaned counsel for the petitioner and the leaned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No. 13 of 2018, registered under Sections 379 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur. The accusation is that on 06.01.2018, the informant Arvind Kumar was doing work at Vishwakarma Summer Sebul Centre situated at Sah market at that time, he kept his Samsung mobile and cash of Rs. 20,000/- in the counter, but after finishing the work, when informant opened the counter then he found mobile as well as cash of Rs. 20,000/- missing from there.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54058 of 2018(3) dt.28-09-2018 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the basis of written report of informant Arvind Kumar, Kotwali P.S. Case No. 13 of 2018 was registered under Sections 379 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code. In course of investigation, the theft mobile set, as detailed in the F.I.R., was located through tower with this petitioner. Further submission is that, in fact, the petitioner had purchased the mobile from someone, but when he came to know about the theft mobile then he handed over the same to the Police and also informed the name of the person, who sold the said mobile to him, but on verification the name of person was found fake.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial Court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial Court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T