Manish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57011 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2019 Thana- EAST COLONY District- Munger ====================================================== Manish Kumar, Aged about 20 years, Male, Son of Shiv Nandan Yadav, Resident of Village Kathara (Karhara), P.S. Piri Bazar, District Lakhisarai. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Jai Prakash Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ganesh Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 13-09-2019 Heard both sides.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in East Colony P.S. Case No.44 of 2019, registered under Sections 401, 467, 468, 471, 413 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code. One Vikash Kumar was apprehended and he disclosed the name of the petitioner and other accused persons who used to commit theft of motorcycles from different places. On such disclosure, one motorcycle was recovered from possession of Vikash Kumar and thereafter many motorcycles were recovered from different persons. The house of the petitioner was also searched and one motorcycle was also recovered from the house of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of theft has not been registered anywhere with regard to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57011 of 2019(2) dt.13-09-2019 2/2 motorcycle recovered from the house of the petitioner. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. It is further submitted that one motorcycle for which Annexure-2 was registered is recovered from the house of Chhotu Yadav but it appears that the petitioner and other accused persons have committed theft of different motorcycles and one person, namely, Vikash Kumar was apprehended and from his possession one motorcycle was recovered. On his disclosure the house of the petitioner was also searched and one stolen motorcycle was recovered. The petitioner did not show any chit of paper of the motorcycle recovered from the house of the petitioner.
Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) S.KUMAR/- U T