Patna High CourtCR. MISC./27533/2014dismissed

Arun Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2015-03-18Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.27533 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -225 Year- 2013 Thana -BAHADURPUR District- DARBHANGA ======================================================

1. Arun Kumar Singh S/o Late Birendra Prasad Singh Resident of Village Bairiya Ganeshpur, Police Station Piprahi, District Sheohar. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Girish Chandra Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Indiwar Kumari (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 18-03-2015 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Bahadurpur P.S. Case No. 225 of 2013, registered for the offences punishable under Section 409 and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code. The gist of allegation against the petitioner is that after the death of Subedar Sagar Honhoga, Ram Singh was ordered to take charge of Koth in the supervision of Ram Pravanjan Chaudhari. During the preparation of inventory, it was found that the petitioner and other Constable-18 Arun Kumar Singh, constable-694 Ramesh Kunwar, Hawaldar Vijay Shankar Pandey made entry in the register during the period of in-charge Koth

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.27533 of 2014 (4) dt.18-03-2015 2/2 Ram Ekwal Pandey. It appears that huge quantity of cartridges were missing. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not in-charge of Koth and he is not at all concerned with the missing of cartridges of different place. It appears that during the intervening period the petitioner made entry in the register after taking keys along with Vijay Shankar Pandey and Ramesh Kunwar and made wrong entry in the register. On physical verification, huge shortage of cartridges was found. Considering the facts aforesaid I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

However, the petitioner, if so advised, may surrender before the court below within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and pray for regular bail and his prayer shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) sushma/- U