Dinesh Kumar Khandelwal @ Pappu Khandelwal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57202 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-386 Year-2021 Thana- HARSIDHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== DINESH KUMAR KHANDELWAL @ PAPPU KHANDELWAL S/o Late Pashupatinah Khandelwal R/V- Harsidhi, P.S.- Harsidhi, Distt- East Champaran at Motihari.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Amit Kumar Rakesh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 02-01-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within three weeks.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 320, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act pending in the learned Court below.

As per the F.I.R., the son of the informant went to the block and hospital. When he returned back and reached Chhapawa Harsidhi Main road. In the meantime two miscreants by motorcycle came there and shoot down his son due to which he was seriously injured. During the treatment the son of the informant was died. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. only on the basis of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57202 of 2022(2) dt.02-01-2023 2/2 the confessional statement of the co-accused, Sachin Kumar, he has been made accused in this case. He submits that similarly situated coaccused has already been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.09.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 19111/2022. He further submits that petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of this application. Per contra, learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the petitioner is also involved in this case, hence he does not deserve anticipatory bail. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined the enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Harsidhi P.S. Case No.386/2021. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected.

However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today and prays for regular bail, the same shall be considered by the learned Court below on the same day without being prejudiced by this order. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) ajay/- U T