Ram Nagina Singh @ Ram Nagina Yadav @ Nagina Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.44048 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -21 Year- 2012 Thana -NAVHATTA District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) =========================================================== Ram Nagina Singh @ Ram Nagina Yadav @ Nagina Yadav S/o Late Shankar Yadav R/o-Village- Banda, P.S.-Nauhatta, District-Rohtas .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Basant Kumar Singh with Mr. Deovind Kumar, Advocates For the Opposite Party/s :
Mrs. Veena Mukari Jaiswal, APP =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 17-10-2016 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in Nauhatta P.S. Case No. 21 of 2012 dated 05.05.2012 instituted under Sections 147/148/149/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 25(1-B)(a)/26/35 of the Arms Act, 3/4 of the Explosive Substances Act and 17 of the C.L.A. Act.
The allegation against the petitioner is that he is involved in extremist activities.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has been named in the F.I.R. but neither was he arrested from the spot nor any recovery was made and only because of the statement made by
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44048 of 2016 dt.17-10-2016 2/2 the co-accused Bhanu Yadav, who was arrested, he has been falsely implicated in the case. It is submitted that Bhanu Yadav, due to village enmity, has named the petitioner, and he is working as a Gram Kutchery Sachiv of Pipardih Panchayat under Nauhatta Block since the year 2008 and, thus, there was no occasion for him to be associated with any extremist organization.
Learned A.P.P. submits that the name of the petitioner was disclosed right on the spot when Bhanu Yadav was arrested and, thus, chances of false implication are almost ruled out and further, no plausible reason has been shown for false implication. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The application, accordingly, stands dismissed. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Anjani/- U T