Rahul Kumar And ANR v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.8477 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -379 Year- 2016 Thana -MASRAKH District- SARAN ======================================================
1. Rahul Kumar Son of Brij Kishore Thakur Resident of Village- Pakari, P.S. Masharakh.
2. Jai Prakash Sah Son of Raghunath Sah, Resident of Village- Chamaria, P.S. Mashrakh, Both District- Saran.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 28-02-2017 The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Mashrakh P.S. Case No. 379 of 2016, registered for offences punishable under Sections 341, 348, 353, 477, 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they have falsely been implicate in the present case and from perusal of the F.I.R. itself, it appears that no case under Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code is made out and at best only allegation can be made under Section 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
Heard learned counsel for the State and learned Counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8477 of 2017 (2) dt.28-02-2017 2/2 that the petitioners have suppressed the fact of their criminal antecedents in their bail application.
Having heard both sides, in view of the fact that there is direct allegation against these petitioners that they entered into bank and abused the bank staffs and also obstructed them from doing their official work and also in view of the fact that petitioners have criminal antecedents, which has not been disclosed by them in their bail application, as such, I am not inclined to grant the petitioners the privilege of anticipatory bail, it is accordingly rejected.
Let petitioner surrenders before the Court below and pray for regular bail, and if any application is filed for grant of regular bail, the Court below shall consider the same, taking into note the allegations made in the F.I.R and thereafter shall pass an appropriate order, without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.
(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U