This judgment deals with a petition for anticipatory bail in two criminal miscellaneous cases arising from the same police station case involving theft. The court rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail considering the gravity of the offence and the recovery of looted articles from the petitioners' houses.
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.32115 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-467 Year-2020 Thana- DHAKA District- East Champaran
======================================================
NIRAJ KUMAR Son of Vinay Paswan Resident of Village - Malkoniya, P.S.Dhaka (O.P. Pachpakadi), District - East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 32615 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-467 Year-2020 Thana- DHAKA District- East Champaran
====================================================== SATYANARAYAN PASWAN Son of Late Prasad Paswan Resident of Village- Basantpur, P.S.- Kundwachainopur, District- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 32115 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhishek Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Aslam Ansari. (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 32615 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhishek Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Aslam Ansari
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 21-07-2022
Since both the cases arise out of same P.S. case they
have been heard together and are being disposed of by this
common order.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the
State.
Petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32115 of 2021(3) dt.21-07-2022 2/2
for the offence punishable under Section 457, 380, 411 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per the prosecution case, some unknown thieves committed theft of 22 LED tvs and 48 pieces of suitcase trolley from the godown of informant.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners are not named in the FIR. The name of petitioners transpired in this case during the course of investigation. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of petitioners. Petitioners have got clean antecedent.
Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that looted articles were recovered from the house of these petitioners.
Considering the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
BKS/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant anticipatory bail to petitioners in a theft case given that recovered looted articles were found in their possession.
Whether the petitioners are approachable for arrest despite not being named in the FIR originally.
Niraj Kumar and Satyanarayan Paswan
Prabhat Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
