Success applicant prayed for anticipatory bail in connection with FIR involving offences under sections 379, 382, 411, 307, and 326/34 IPC. Court rejected application due to complicity suggested by co-accused's statement and cognizance taken.
Anticipatory bail application rejected. Petitioner may seek regular bail upon surrender within six weeks.
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.46191 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-643 Year-2020 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR SADAR DistrictMuzaffarpur
======================================================
Gaurav Kumar @ Guddu S/O- Mauje Ray @ Manjay Ray Resident of Village- Madhopur Susta, P.S.- Maniyari, District- Muazaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anish Chandra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. A.G. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER
2 14-06-2022
Heard Mr. Anish Chandra, learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Muzaffarpur Sadar P.S.Case No. 643 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under sections 379, 382, 411, 307, 326/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per the prosecution case, it is alleged that while the informant and his friend was sitting in his house all of a sudden, he heard some sound and when he came out from his house, saw three persons were fleeing away with the motorcycle. It is alleged that informant and his friend apprehended two of them after some scuffle, thereafter, apprehended persons disclosed the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46191 of 2021(2) dt.14-06-2022 2/3
name of this petitioner.
It is submitted on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has absolutely clean antecedent and his name has been transpired on the statement of co-accused with whom he had inimical terms.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the petitioner.
Having considered the fact that the name of the petitioner has been disclosed by co-accused which suggests the complicity of this petitioner in the said occurrence, and moreover, cognizance has been taken in the case. This Court is not persuaded to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner stands rejected.
However, it is made clear that if the petitioner surrender before the court below within six weeks from today and makes prayer for regular bail, the learned court below shall consider the regular bail of the petitioner without being prejudice to the present order.
(Harish Kumar, J.)
N.K/-
U T
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46191 of 2021(2) dt.14-06-2022 3/3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted despite disclosure of petitioner's name by a co-accused.
Gaurav Kumar @ Guddu
The State Of Bihar
HARISH KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
