Roushan Kumar Singh @ Roushan Kumar Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69117 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-497 Year-2018 Thana- RAJAON District- Banka ====================================================== Roushan Kumar Singh @ Roushan Kumar Ram S/O Pramanand Ram @ Parmanand Ram @ Parmanand Singh R/O Village- Khorouni, P.S.- Rajoun, Distt- Banka.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate :

Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Pathak, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Akbar Ali, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 01-05-2023 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State.

Let the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today. The accused/petitioner is named in F.I.R. and apprehending his arrest in connection with Rajoun P.S. Case No. 497 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation against this petitioner is to commit theft and while committing so taken away a motorcycle belongs to informant.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69117 of 2022(2) dt.01-05-2023 2/2 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that implication is false only for the reason that the present F.I.R. was lodged on 14.12.2018, whereas occurrence is of 08.12.2018. It is submitted that petitioner falsely implicated in this case out of local dispute and differences. While concluding the argument, it is submitted that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent.

Learned APP, while opposing the prayer of bail submitted that petitioner is named in F.I.R. and informant is the eye witness of the occurrence. It is submitted that from the narration of F.I.R., it appears that petitioner involved in theft activities in organized manner. It is also submitted that recovery of motorcycle is yet to be made in this case, where investigation is under progress.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as informant is the eye witness of the occurrence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner is rejected herewith. (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) Archana/- U T