Pankaj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.30579 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -165 Year- 2012 Thana -BARBIGHA District- SEKHPURA ====================================================== Pankaj Kumar Son of Arun Kumar Singh, resident of Village-Telari, P.S.- Rupau, District-Nawada.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Arun, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Chandra Sahni (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 14-01-2015 Heard Mr. Arun Kumar Arun, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Barbigha P.S. Case No. 165 of 2012 registered for offence punishable under Sections 467, 468, 471, 120B and 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Two persons were apprehended from the bank premises alongwith a stamp pad, account opening forms, some A.T.M. cards, Pass books, a seal of police station and other incriminating materials. On interrogation they confessed that they indulged in illegal withdrawals of cash from account holders. The name of the petitioner alongwith some others including Swaraj Kumar and Amrendra Kumar @ Pinku transpired during the course of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30579 of 2014 (2) dt.14-01-2015 investigation on a confession made by one of the accused who was apprehended within the bank premises, namely, Mithilesh Kumar.

The records of the present proceedings reflect that two of the persons whose names had transpired in the matter on the basis of confessional statement of accused Mithilesh Kumar, namely, Swaraj Kumar and Amrendra Kumar @ Pinku moved this Court in Criminal Misc. No. 4060 of 2013 and Criminal Misc. No. 4381 of 2013 respectively for anticipatory bail and their bail applications were disposed of with a direction to the court below to consider their prayer for regular bail on their surrender. This Court not being persuaded with the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail disposes of the application with direction to the petitioner to surrender before the court below and make a prayer for regular bail which should be considered by the court below on its own merits and without being prejudiced by the order passed in the present proceedings.

(Jyoti Saran, J) S.Sb/- U