Kundan Kumar Singh @ Kundan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.56531 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -138 Year- 2017 Thana -BHAGWAN BAZAR District- SARAN ====================================================== KUNDAN KUMAR SINGH @ KUNDAN KUMAR, S/o Dinesh Singh, Resident of Village- Nawada, P.S. Revelganj, District- Saran at Chapra. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anurag Saurav For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Naresh Ray ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 18-01-2018 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P. for the State.

In this application for anticipatory bail the petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bhagwan Bazar P.S. Case No. 138 of 2017 for the offences punishable under sections 395 and 397 of the I.P.C.

Allegedly, motorcycle borne criminals after giving knife blow snatched the bag of the informant containing cash of Rs. 70,000/- and other documents and further snatched mobiles from the pocket. During investigation the name of the petitioner transpires that he along with others were seen and further in the confessional statement of co-accused Brajesh Kumar, Kanishak Kumar, Anurag Kumar and Guddu Kumar also the name of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.56531 of 2017 (3) dt.18-01-2018 2/2 petitioner has transpired.

Submission is of false implication and that nothing has been recovered from possession of the petitioner, the looted mobiles have been recovered from possession of Brajesh Kumar, the petitioner has not been arrested at the spot and he is not named in the FIR and as such he deserves sympathetic consideration. The learned A.P.P. opposes prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner by referring paragraphs- 67 to 69 of the case diary and also the confessional statement of the co-accused. In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the materials available against the petitioner collected during investigation, I am not inclined to grant privilege of prearrest bail to the petitioner and accordingly his such prayer stands rejected in connection with the aforementioned case pending in the court of C.J.M. Saran at Chapra.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T