Ramanand Pandey @ Aryan Pandey v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64280 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-104 Year-2022 Thana- KHAIRA District- Jamui ====================================================== RAMANAND PANDEY @ ARYAN PANDEY Son of Sanjay Pandey R/VKhaira, P.S- Khaira, Dist- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ranjeet Patel For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 24-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.
The petitioner apprehend his arrest in connection with Khaira P.S. Case No.104 of 2022, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 395, 412 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith other co-accused persons looted Rs.2,00,000/- from the informant which he had withdrawn from bank.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and have committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. There is no specific overt act against the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64280 of 2022(2) dt.24-02-2023 2/2 petitioner. The name of the petitioner has been roped in this case only on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Suman Kumar Pandey. There is no recovery of looted articles from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Petitioner has two criminal antecedent.
Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the petitioner is also involved in the present case.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T