Bogi Yadav @ Pawan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73362 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2017 Thana- MOKAMAH District- Patna ====================================================== BOGI YADAV @ PAWAN YADAV S/o Lootan Yadav R/o village- Dargahi Tola, P.S.- Pandarak, Distt- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Premchandra Yadav For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Arun Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 03-02-2023 Heard both sides.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mokama P.S. Case No.09 of 2017, registered for the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR is against 10-12 unknown accused persons. It is alleged that on 30.01.2017, at about 10.00 p.m., the informant alongwith co-driver of the truck was going to his house. When informant reached 100-150 meter ahead of railway bridge, 7-8 accused persons stopped his truck. The accused persons took the informant and co-driver with them and looted the mobile phone, Rs.1700/- cash and Hanumani Chakti made of gold from the informant.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73362 of 2022(2) dt.03-02-2023 2/2 present case. It is submitted that the petitioner has got two criminal antecedents as stated in paragraph-3 of the bail application. It is further submitted that petitioner is not named in the FIR and the apprehended accused disclosed the name of the petitioner in his confessional statement. It is also submitted that petitioner was not remanded in the instant case by the police, therefore, the petitioner has filed the instant bail petition. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Considering the nature of offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is hereby rejected.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) S.KUMAR/- U T