Pushkar Kumar @ Pushkar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66048 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-198 Year-2012 Thana- ARARIA District- Araria ====================================================== Pushkar Kumar @ Pushkar Singh Son of Late Ganesh Singh Resident of Village - Tamghatti, P.S. - Bousi, District - Araria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Prateek Tandon For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Rina Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-01-2025 Heard Mr. Prateek Tandon, learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Araria P.S. Case No. 198 of 2012, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 364, 365, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Based upon the written report, the prosecution alleges that on 24.05.2012, while the informant was going to his friend's house, in the meantime, he was kidnapped by named accused persons and taken away by a Sumo Vehicle and kept in an unknown place. However, while the accused persons were sleeping, the informant managed to escape from the clutches of the accused persons and got the FIR registered.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66048 of 2024(3) dt.18-01-2025 2/3
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is not named in the FIR, however for the first time his name was surfaced on the confessional statement of coaccused person; save and except the confessional statement, there is no material. The petitioner was not knowing even this fact that his name has ever been transpired in the confessional statement of co-accused person and, as such, he could not ensure his presence before the jurisdictional court. It is the contention of the petitioner that recently he came to know when non bailable warrant has been issued against him. Moreover, the other co-accused persons named in the FIR have been allowed bail by this Court way back in the year 2012 and 2013 itself. The petitioner bears fair antecedent and he is ready to cooperate in the proceeding of the court.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the petitioner has been evading the due process of law for the last 12 years and moreover the process under Section 83 Cr.P.C. has already been issued way back on 28.01.2013 itself, copy of which is attached with the case diary.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66048 of 2024(3) dt.18-01-2025 3/3 has been evading evading from law and the process under Section 83 Cr.P.C. has already been issued, this Court is not inclined to accede to the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands rejected.
7. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the court below, preferably within a period of four weeks, the learned court below shall consider the case of the petitioner on merit without being prejudiced by the order of this Court and also taking note of the fact that the other co-accused persons named in the FIR have been allowed the privilege of bail by the Court.
(Harish Kumar, J) Anjani/- U