Patna High CourtCR. MISC./60946/2019bail rejected

Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2019-09-26Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60946 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2019 Thana- MUSRIGHRARI District- Samastipur ====================================================== Chandan Kumar, S/o Late Jay Prakash Yadav @ Jay Prakash Bhagat @ Bahuran Rai, R/o Village- Adharpur, P.S.- Muffasil, District- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jitendra Narain Sinha, Advocate.

Ms. Kumari Vandana, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Naresh Ray ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 26-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Musrigharari P.S. Case No. 37 of 2019, registered under Sections 392 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of J.M. Ist Class, Samastipur. The accusation is that while the informant, Amarjeet Singh, along with his brother was returning to their hotel then in the way, four persons came on two motorcycles and dashed to his motorcycle. After creating the fear on the point of pistol, all took his bags containing gold about 1750 Gram, cash of Rs.90,000/- and cheques. The informant claimed to identify the culprits on seeing them again.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60946 of 2019(2) dt.26-09-2019 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in course of investigation, Amarjit Kumar Jha was apprehended, who disclosed the name of petitioner as his associates, saying the involvement of the petitioner in the present case. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the informant claimed to identified the culprits on seeing them again, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T