Patna High CourtCR. MISC./56770/2017rejected

Arbind Kumar @ Arvind Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2018-01-03Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.56770 of 2017 (2) dt.03-01-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.56770 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -435 Year- 2017 Thana -BIHTA District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Arbind Kumar @ Arvind Kumar, son of Ganesh Prasad, resident of Village- Bela, P.S.- Bihata, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Harendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 03-01-2018 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Bihta P.S. Case No.435 of 2017 registered under Sections 414 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant alleged that two persons were going on a motorcycle but the registration number of the aforesaid motorcycle was not written properly. When the informant tried to intercept the motorcyclists, both the motorcyclists started fleeing away. One Ajit Kumar was apprehended and he disclosed the name of the petitioner who managed to flee away. Ajit Kumar disclosed that the motorcycle is stolen one and they had come to sell the motorcycle.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.56770 of 2017 (2) dt.03-01-2018 petitioner was not arrested on the spot but the name of the petitioner figured in the case in confessional statement of Ajit Kumar. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that save and except one criminal case, the petitioner has got no other criminal case pending against him but it appears that the petitioner was moving along with Ajit Kumar on the motorcycle and petitioner managed to flee away. Ajit Kumar disclosed that he and petitioner had come to sell the motorcycle and the motorcycle is stolen one. Petitioner has also got a criminal case pending against him registered under Section 380 of the I.P.C. Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Saurabh/- U T