Sunil Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58760 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2021 Thana- BISHUNPUR District- Darbhanga ====================================================== SUNIL YADAV S/O NARESH YADAV Resident of village- Chandi, P.S.- Bahadurpur, District- Darbhanga.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kedar Jha, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dilip Kumar No.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 09-01-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 401, 414, 413 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned Xth Addl. Sessions Judge, Darbhanga.

As per FIR, when informant with other police personnel were on petrolling duty, they secret informatin about selling of stolen motorcycle by someone near Fatima fuel at 10 o'clock night. For verification of informant, informant with other police personnel reached at fatima fuel. After seeing the Police all accused persons stated to flee, but three person got apprehended by police and two persons managed their escape. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58760 of 2022(2) dt.09-01-2023 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that apprehended persons disclosed the name of the petitioner that he is also involved in the present case. He further submits that there is enmity between both the parties which is mentioned para-9 of the bail application. He further submits that petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of this application.

Per contra, learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature, hence he does not deserve anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that apprehended persons disclosed the name of the petitioner, I am not inclined the enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Bishanpur P.S. Case No.98/2021. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) ajay/- U T