Vikram @ Mannu Singh @ Vikram Raj @ Mannu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.58724 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -213 Year- 2017 Thana -HAJIPUR SADAR DistrictVAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Vikram @ Mannu Singh @ Vikram Raj @ Mannu S/o Late Ganesh Prasad Singh, R/o Village- Dighi Kala West, Basant Bihar Colony, P.S.- Hajipur Sadar, District- Vaishali at Hajipur.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranvijay Narain Singh, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-12-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case for the offence registered under Sections 341, 323, 385, 387, 379, 504, 506/34 of the IPC and 37(b)(c) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that while the informant was installing Transformer in a village, the petitioner alongwith others in drunken state abused, assaulted the informant and demanded Rs. 50,000/- as ransom from him. On protest made by the informant, the petitioner and others also snatched cash Rs. 30,700 and took gold chain worth Rs. 90,000 and wrist watch and mobile worth Rs. 10,000/-.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.58724 of 2017 (2) dt.13-12-2017 2/2 petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner was not present on the spot. Due to village politics, the name of the petitioner has come in the present case. Except for this, there is no other substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in this case.

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. The petitioner alongwith other accused persons in a drunken state had objected installation of Transformer.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected in connection with Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No. 213 of 2017, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions JudgeII, Vaishali at Hajipur. Anyhow, if the petitioner surrenders in the court below within a period of six weeks from today and prays for regular bail the same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by the order of this Court. U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T