Awnish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.2816 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -317 Year- 2011 Thana -SITAMARHI District- SITAMARHI ====================================================== Awnish Kumar, son of Kameshwar Singh, resident of Village - Sugiya Katsari, P.S. & District - Sheohar.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hans Lal Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kr. Singh (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 13-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sitamarhi P.S. Case No.317 of 2011 registered under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no direct evidence to connect this petitioner with the alleged offence under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. He further submits that the petitioner has no criminal history and, therefore, he may be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.

On the other hand learned APP representing the State submits that in fact this case was lodged in the year 2011. The motorcycle and looted cash as well as two mobiles were taken away

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2816 of 2018 (3) dt.13-02-2018 by three miscreants who were boarding on a motorcycle. On hulla raised by the informant the miscreants were chased by the villagers, but the miscreants fled away opening firing leaving their motorcycle and motorcycle of the informant. On the said motorcycle which was being used by three miscreants sufficient materials have been found to connect this petitioner with the alleged offence. Considering the facts and circumstances, particularly that the motorcycle of the miscreants had certain materials connecting this petitioner with the alleged offence and this case is of the year 2011, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

The application is dismissed.

If the petitioner surrenders in the court below and prays for regular bail, then the same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by the present order. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Arvind/- U T