Patna High CourtCR. MISC./46869/2016rejected

Mukesh Rai v. The State Of Bihar

2017-04-20Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.46869 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -85 Year- 2015 Thana -BAIKUNTHPUR District- GOPALGANJ ====================================================== Mukesh Rai, Son of Bhuneshwar Rai, Resident of Village- Allepur, Post Rajapatti, P.S. Baikunthpur, District- Gopalganj. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Binod Kumar 2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 20-04-2017 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Baikunthpur PS case no. 85 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 414, 411 of Indian Penal Code and 25(1-b) a, 26 and 35 of Arms Act.

It is alleged that the informant has got information that jwelleries and motorcycle were robbed from one businessman namely Baliram Sah. During course of investigation, the police apprehended one Sagar Manjhi and from his possession, many looted articles were recovered. Sagar Manjhi confessed his guilt and disclosed the name of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that save and except the confessional statement of Sagar Manjhi, there

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46869 of 2016 (5) dt.20-04-2017 2/2 is no any material against the petitioner. It is further submitted that informant has disclosed that he is well acquainted with the petitioner and he was not participated in the robbery. From perusal of the record, it appears that at the time of occurrence, petitioner was accompanying Sagar Manjhi and Sagar Manjhi disclosed the entire facts and on his confession, the said looted articles were recovered from the possession of petitioner.

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

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) rinkee/- U T