Awdhesh @ Kanahiya Mishra v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81687 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-128 Year-2019 Thana- TARABARI District- Araria ====================================================== Awdhesh @ Kanahiya Mishra, Son of Gangadhar Mishra @ Gangadhar Jha Resident of Village - Tegachhiya Ward No. 7, P.S.- Tarabari, District - Araria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Gopal Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Renuka Ratnakar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 19-06-2020 Heard leaned counsel for the petitioner and the leaned A.P.P. for the State through video conferencing. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Tarabari P.S. Case No. 128 of 2019, registered under Sections 341, 323, 379, 384, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of the learned A.C.J.M-V, Araria.

The accusation is that informant Sanjay Kumar Pandit, being the driver of four wheeler, parked the same at the house of Md. Mashroof Alam, who is owner of four wheeler, and proceeded from there boarding on motorcycle bearing registration No. BR-39J-2574, in the way, three persons boarding on blue-black colour Pulsar motorcycle without registration number overtaken his motorcycle and snatched his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81687 of 2019(3) dt.19-06-2020 2/2 motorcycle, Nokia mobile and a bag containing Laptop. At that time, in the headlight of motorcycle, he identified Anku Kumar @ Abhishekh, Ajit Kumar Mishra and Awdhesh @ Kanahiya Mishra (Petitioner).

Submission is that it would appear from the F.I.R. that informant is known to the petitioner and other co-accused and due to dirty local politics, informant disclosed the name of petitioner.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail stands rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial Court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial Court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T