Rajesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50160 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-145 Year-2022 Thana- DUMRA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== RAJESH KUMAR SON OF LAXMI PASWAN R/O VILLAGE- RAJ KHAND, P.S.- SAMATIPUR (M), DISTRICT- SAMASTIPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sujit Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Kalyan Shankar, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 20-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defect (s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly, open aluminium wire, electric pole, covered aluminium wire, small pieces of old covered wire in a bundle etc. have been recovered from the pick-up van. After seeing the police, all the accused persons fled away from the spot. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. No

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50160 of 2022(3) dt.20-02-2023 2/2 such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. His name has been transpired in this case because he is owner of the Pick up van. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that it is mentioned in para 47 of the case diary that petitioner has one criminal antecedent. He was an accused in Samastipur Muffasil P.S. Case No. 80 of 2016 dated 29.03.2016 under Section 448, 341, 323, 324, 504, 506, 34 of the IPC in which charge-sheet was submitted.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, as the petitioner suppressed the fact about his criminal antecedent, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) divyanshi/- U T