Sanjay Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47743 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-226 Year-2018 Thana- MAHESI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Sanjay Sahani, Son of Nabalak Sahani @ Nabalik Sahani, R/o VillageChandparsa, P.S.- Kesariya, District- East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Amit Kumar Rakesh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 31-07-2019 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in the name of the petitioner. This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Mehsi P.S. Case No. 226 of 2018, disclosing offences under Sections 379, 420, 467, 468, 411 and 120B of IPC.

Prosecution story is that police got an information that some miscreants were sitting in a Maruti Car, on that information, police party raided there and saw that a Maruti Car without registration number and arrested one accused Rupak Kumar. The police chased the car, but they succeeded in fleeing away from the spot. Later on, arrested person disclosed the name of the petitioner and others. From the arrested person, three ATM Cards of SBI were recovered and accordingly, seizure list was prepared. It further appears that petitioner is also

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47743 of 2019(2) dt.31-07-2019 2/2 an accused in two other cases.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he has been made accused only on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused and except that there is nothing against him.

Heard learned A.P.P. also, who has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail on the ground that apart from that confessional statement, there are criminal antecedent of the petitioner.

Having heard both sides, in view of the allegation made above, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

With the aforesaid, this application is dismissed. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sunil Shukla/- U T