Randhir Yadav @ Randhir Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71555 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-594 Year-2022 Thana- BIHTA District- Patna ====================================================== RANDHIR YADAV @ RANDHIR KUMAR S/O CHHOTELAL RAI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- HIRAMANPUR, P.S.- BIHTA, DISTRICTPATNA ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Binayak Kumar Shrivastav For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 19-03-2024
1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Bihta Police Station Case No. 594 of 2022, disclosing offences under Sections 392 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, while the informant was going to Bhadesar in the pick up van, registered in the name of his cousin brother namely Bipin Singh, bearing registration No. BR03GB-4657, with one Satyendra Kumar Singh, two unknown persons threw a gas cylinder in front of the pick van in order to stop the van and two other known persons came and started abusing the informant and one out of them pointed gun towards the informant in order to get them out from the pick up van. Then, another unknown person came, started the van and escaped from the point and rest three persons took all the articles on the point of gun. It is also alleged that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71555 of 2023(4) dt.19-03-2024 2/2 unknown persons took two PNB ATMs, one box, one bank steel, driving license including Rs. 10,000/- from the informant.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation against the petitioner is false and baseless and the petitioner got implicated on the basis of suspicion. He further submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and is having no criminal antecedent.
5. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration, the nature of offence and the fact that FIR is registered under Section 392 of the IPC which is non-bailable, Vikash Kumar, in his confessional statement, clearly stated that the petitioner was actively involved in the alleged robbery along with other co-accused persons, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. This application is, accordingly, rejected. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) HarshPandey/- U T