Pravin Kumar @ Praveen Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58117 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2022 Thana- BACHHWARA District- Begusarai ====================================================== PRAVIN KUMAR @ PRAVEEN KUMAR S/O KRISHNANDAN RAI @ KRISHNANAND RAY Resident of Village- Chiraiyatok, Ward No.- 10, P.S.- Bachhwara, District- Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sandip Kumar Gautam For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rabindra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 03-01-2023 Heard the parties.

The petitioner apprehend his arrest in connection with Bachhwara P.S. case no.02 of 2022, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 386, 387, 323, 379, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 27 of the Arms Act. The allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith other co-accused persons demanded rangdari from the informant. It is alleged that the accused persons also threatened to murder the informant in case of non-fulfillment of rangdari amount.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and have committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58117 of 2022(2) dt.03-01-2023 2/2 the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He further submits that the petitioner has been made accused in the present case only on the basis of confessional statement of apprehended co-accused persons, namely, Ashok Kumar and Ajay Rai. There is no specific overt act against the petitioner. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail by submitting that from the perusal of the impugned order it is clear that the petitioner is also involved in the present case.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned court below within four weeks from today and seek for regular bail, the court below shall pass the order, preferably on the same day, in accordance with law, considering the fact that there is no specific overt act against the petitioner.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T