Patna High CourtCR. MISC./61263/2023bail rejected

Vikash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2023-10-17Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61263 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2022 Thana- SHIVSAGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== VIKASH KUMAR SON OF JITENDRA BIND VILLAGE PATARHI PS SHEOSAGAR DIST ROHTAS ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Alka Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nand Kishore Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 17-10-2023

1. Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Shivsagar P.S. Case No. 26 / 2022 registered for the offences under Section 392 of the I.P.C.

3. As per prosecution case on 19-01-2022 the informant along with Md. Zafar, Md. Neyajuddin and Arman Gaddi were going to Sasaram from Varanasi in a Scorpio vehicle. In the meanwhile, at about 11:15 P.M. the vehicle's tyre got burst near Ghorhat. While the informant was changing the punctured tyre, in the meanwhile, one person pointed out pistol upon the informant and others and on the point of pistol they snatched mobile phone of Vivo company of the informant and also snatched golden chain and mobile phone of Md. Neyajuddin and cash of Rs. 42,000/-. They also snatched mobile

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61263 of 2023(2) dt.17-10-2023 2/2 phone of Md. Zaffar and Arman Gaddi. As per the FIR total four mobile phones, cash of Rs. 42000/- and one golden chain was snatched by three miscreants.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in the First Information Report. He has been made accused on the ground that one of snatched mobiles has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel next submits that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and the petitioner along with his brother have been made accused whereas there is criminal antecedent against the petitioner's brother.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Taking into consideration the fact that looted mobile has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, as such, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. The application stands rejected.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) praful/- U T