Patna High CourtCR. MISC./74885/2018rejected

Bablu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2019-01-09Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.74885 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-285 Year-2018 Thana- LAHERI District- Nalanda ====================================================== Bablu Kumar, Son of Sita Ram Yadav, Resident of Village-Makanpur, P.S.- Noorsarai, District- Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ranvijay Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Smt. Pushpa Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 09-01-2019 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Laheri P.S. case No. 285 of 2018 registered under Section 379, 411/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant alleged that he was waiting for a Rickshaw to go to his home. He saw that one Pick up van bearing registration No. BR21G-3115 came and stopped near him. On seeing the informant, his two salesman Sanjay and Bablu, the petitioner, fled away. Sonu Kumar @ Abhishek disclosed that he purchased the plywood from Sanjay and Bablu.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that police in supervision in paragraph 52 of the case diary disclosed that salesman came on the place of occurrence after telephone

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.74885 of 2018(3) dt.09-01-2019 2/2 call. There is no material to show that petitioner committed theft of the plywood from the shop of the informant. The shop of the informant was found intact. The door was not broken but it appears from perusal of the case diary and the FIR that petitioner and Sanjay were working in the shop of informant and they sold plywood to Abhishek, who was carrying the same on pick up van and the pick up van was recovered from the place of occurrence.

Considering the facts aforesaid and nature of allegation made against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T