Patna High CourtCR. MISC./49932/2019rejected

Dinesh Pd. Bhagat @ Dinesh Prasad Bhagat v. The State Of Bihar

2019-08-13Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49932 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-880 Year-2018 Thana- ARARIA District- Araria ====================================================== Dinesh Pd. Bhagat @ Dinesh Prasad Bhagat Son of Late Hira Lal Bhagat, Resident of Village - Bhagat Tola, Ward No.28, P.S. and Dist.- Araria (Near Raju Tent Shop).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Abhijeet Gautam For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 13-08-2019 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Araria P.S. Case No.880 of 2018 registered under Sections 379 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant got information about theft in his godown. The informant apprehended the thief, who committed theft in his godown. The apprehended accused disclosed that he kept the stolen pipes in the house of Dinesh Prasad Bhagat (petitioner). On such, the informant and others went there and recovered eight pipes.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that from perusal of the seizure list it would appear that one Manto Kumar Rai handed over the stolen pipes to the police and not the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49932 of 2019(2) dt.13-08-2019 2/2 informant. The police kept the investigation pending against the petitioner although submitted charge sheet against the accused Md. Samad, who was apprehended, but it appears from the F.I.R. that the informant and others after apprehending the accused person raided the house of the petitioner and recovered eight pipes from the house of the petitioner. The pipes were produced before the police.

Having considered the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

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