Petitioner challenged anticipatory bail granted in PS Case No.33 of 2019 involving charges under IPC Sections 457, 380, and 414. The court rejected the petition, noting lack of possession arrest but acknowledging criminal antecedents.
Anticipatory bail petition rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55136 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2019 Thana- MUFFASIL District- West Champaran
====================================================== ANGAD CHAUDHARY S/o Brijesh Chaudhary @ Girijesh Chaudhari R/o village- Bagaha Bankatwa Purab Tola, P.S.- Bagaha, District- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Kr Singh No. 1 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajendra Singh ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER
4 18-12-2019 Heard both sides.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Bettiah(M) Manuapool P.S. Case No.33 of 2019 registered under Sections 457, 380 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code.
The informant alleged that on 14.01.2019 at about 1.30 A.M. in the night while he woke up to urinate, he saw two persons hiding behind his house. On alarm, both the persons started fleeing away but on chase, one Vikram Chaudhary was apprehended. Vikram Chaudhary disclosed the name of his accomplice, Angad Chaudhary(the petitioner). It is further alleged that a theft was committed in his house and thieves, Vikram Chaudhary and Angad Chaudhary(the petitioner) took away the box containing cash of Rs.50,000/- besides ornaments
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55136 of 2019(4) dt.18-12-2019 2/2
and cloths.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not apprehended on the spot. The name of the petitioner figured in the case on the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused, Vikram Chaudhary but nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner.
It appears that Vikram Chaudhary was apprehended while he was fleeing away after committing theft and he disclosed that the petitioner managed to flee away with the box containing ornaments, cash and cloths stolen from the house of the informant. Petitioner has got criminal antecedent and he is accused in as many as five other cases, all registered under Sections 379, 380 and 457 of the Indian penal Code.
Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)
Saurabh/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail while awaiting trial in a theft case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Angad Chaudhary
The State of Bihar
Prabhat Kumar Jha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
