Ravi @ Ravi Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56964 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-175 Year-2021 Thana- BARH District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

RAVI @ RAVI KUMAR Son of Mantu Singh Resident of Village - Gosain Math (Umanath), P.S.- Barh, Distt.- Patna.

2.

MANISH SINGH Son of Mantu Singh Resident of Village - Gosain Math (Umanath), P.S.- Barh, Distt.- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Suraj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anita Kumari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 23-08-2022 Vide order dated 21.01.2022, the prayer for bail of petitioner no.2, namely, Manish Singh @ Manish Kumar has already been dismissed as withdrawn.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner no.1 and learned APP for the State and perused the case diary. The petitioner no.1 is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1AB) of the Arms Act. It is a case of snatching the service revolver of the informant by the petitioner along with other accused persons. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner no. 1 has falsely been implicated in this case.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56964 of 2021(5) dt.23-08-2022 2/2 Learned APP appearing for the State opposed the anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is named in the FIR and during investigation, the informant and other witnesses have supported the prosecution case and asserted about the complicity of the petitioner in the alleged offence. The name of the petitioner also came in the confessional statement of co-accused. This is a major offence of snatching of service revolver from the police official which is serious in nature.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the court below and pray for regular bail and the court below may pass order without being prejudiced by this order. (Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T