Bibhash Chaudhary @ Saurav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80085 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-255 Year-2024 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Bibhash Chaudhary @ Saurav Son of Gopal Chaudhary R/O Vill.- Sahpur, P.S.- Tisiauta,Dist.- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 03-12-2024 Heard learned counsels for the parties.

2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bidupur P.S. Case No.255 of 2024, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

As per the FIR, informant gave his truck to this petitioner for driving. However, thereafter, this petitioner did not inform about the whereabouts of the truck and lastly, said that the truck has been stolen and thereafter, switched off his mobile phone. 4.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. It is further submitted that a truck bearing Reg. No.RJ-11GD-9452 was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80085 of 2024(2) dt.03-12-2024 2/2 seized in Excise Act for which a FIR was lodged as Bilaspur Gurugram P.S. Case No.45 of 2024 for which the petitioner was in judicial custody since 11.02.2024 and there is no possibility that the petitioner is involved in the present case. Petitioner has one criminal antecedent.

5.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

6.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as considering the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected. 7.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T