Raju Sahni @ Raju Kumar Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49706 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-329 Year-2022 Thana- KALYANPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== RAJU SAHNI @ RAJU KUMAR SAHNI Son of Kishun Sahni Resident of village - Jagdishpur, P.S. - Kalyanpur, Distt. - Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjit Kumar Yadav For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 29-08-2023 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner apprehend his arrest in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No.329 of 2022, registered for the offence punishable under Section 382, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Allegedly, the petitioner along with other co-accused persons snatched money, important documents and Tablet of Samsung company from the informant.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and have committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR, his name transpired in the present case on the basis

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49706 of 2023(3) dt.29-08-2023 2/2 of confessional statement of apprehended co-accused. Petitioner has one criminal antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. He further submits that the name of the petitioner has transpired in the present case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused. In this regard the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Indresh Kumar vs. State of Uttar Pradesh in Cr. APP. No.938 of 2022 may also be taken into consideration in which it has been observed that the statements made under Section 161 of Cr.PC. are relevant in considering the prima facie case against an accused in an application for grant of bail in cases of grave offence.

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

7. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T