Bechan Tanti v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.74886 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-496 Year-2018 Thana- KAHALGAON District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Bechan Tanti, Son of Shrinath Tanti, Resident of Village-Badhua tola, P.O.- Olapur, P.S.-Pirpainti, District-Bhagalpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Madan Mohan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sri Nirmal Kumar Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 10-01-2019 Heard both sides.

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in Kahalgaon (Ghogha) P.S. Case No.496 of 2018 registered under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. Later on Sections 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code were added.

The informant Kalim Ahmad Khan, the driver of truck bearing Registration No.UP-27-AT 1340, alleged that he along with his cleaner were returning to Bhagalpur after unloading Gur but some miscreants surrounded and looted Rs.50,400/-, other articles and mobiles from possession of the driver, the informant and cleaner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioner figured in the case in the confessional statement of co-accused,

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.74886 of 2018(3) dt.10-01-2019 2/2 Ravi Kumar. Save and except the confession of Ravi Kumar, the Investigating Officer did not collect any tangible evidence but from perusal of the case diary, it appears that during the course of investigation, Ravi Kumar, the co-accused, was arrested and from his possession one mobile and Rs.4200/-, looted money, was recovered. Ravi Kumar disclosed the name of the petitioner and other accused persons. Thereafter Chhotu Kumar and Mithun Paswan were also apprehended and from their possession also looted money was recovered. They also disclosed the name of the petitioner as one of the participant in the road dacoity.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid and the fact that the investigation requires identification of the petitioner by the informant, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) S.KUMAR/- U T