Sheet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87015 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1110 Year-2024 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura ====================================================== Sheet Kumar S/O Rajesh Yadav R/O Vill.- Dighiya, P.S. and Dist.- Madhepura.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dilip Kr. No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 18-12-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dilip Kr. No. 1, learned APP for the State.

2.

Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Madhepura P.S. Case No.1110 of 2024, registered for the offence punishable u/s 308(4), 318(4), 3(5), 140(3) of BNS, 3.

Allegedly, two persons riding on the motorcycle came to the informant, brought the informant near the bridge and demanded Rs.5,00,000/-. They also withdrawn Rs.70,000/- using phone pay, looted some cash and golden chain from the informant.

4.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. There is general and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87015 of 2024(2) dt.18-12-2024 2/2 omnibus allegation against the petitioner. There is no specific overt act attributed against the petitioner. There is no recovery of looted article from conscious possession of the petitioner. Petitioner has been made accused in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused person. Petitioner has one criminal antecedent as mentioned in para 3 of the bail application.

5.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that petitioner is involved in this case. 6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and 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.

This application is accordingly dismissed.

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