Nitesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66593 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-153 Year-2024 Thana- LALIT NARAYAN UNIVERSITY District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Nitesh Kumar Son of Shyam Kumar Prasad R/o Village- Shankarpur, P.O. Tepri, P.S.- Hattha, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Binod Kumar NO.3, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-10-2024 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Binod Kumar No.-3, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with LNMU P.S. Case No. 153/ 2024 dated 02.06.2024 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 406, 420 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code

3. The main submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner are that the petitioner has fair and clean antecedent and as per the F.I.R., the alleged occurrence with regard to theft of informant's poultry feed bags took place on 30.05.2024 but the F.I.R. was lodged on 02.06.2024 despite the alleged occurrence having come in the knowledge of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66593 of 2024(2) dt.08-10-2024 2/3 informant on the same day and further, as per the F.I.R., the allegation of theft/ misappropriation is against the informant's driver, Vikash Kumar Mishra, who was entrusted with the alleged stolen bags for transporting the same to a particular place and on the way, as per allegation, the alleged bags containing poultry feed were disappeared by the informant's driver, hence, there is no allegation of theft/ misappropriation of poultry feed bags against this petitioner.

It is further submitted that as per the allegation, only 76 bags containing poultry feed which are alleged to be stolen bags of the present matter were recovered from the poultry farm of the petitioner but admittedly, the petitioner himself runs a poultry farm, so, merely on account of recovery of the said bags the criminal liability with regard to the alleged offence punishable under section 411 of the IPC which is only made out against the petitioner, cannot be fastened upon the petitioner and further, the said offence is compoundable and the informant has compromised with the petitioner and in this regard, a copy of compromise petition has been annexed with this petition (Annexure-P/2).

4. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the bail prayer of the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66593 of 2024(2) dt.08-10-2024 3/3 case as well as the above submissions, coupled with the fair and clean antecedent of the petitioner and also the factum of compromise made by the informant with this petitioner, in my opinion, the petitioner deserves to the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, let the petitioner named-above, in the event of his arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with LNMU P.S. Case No. 153/ 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/-(Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Shailendra Singh, J) BKS/- U T