Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Kumar Singh vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 1159 Patna

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 31842 of 2020
        Arising Out of PS Case No.-52 Year-2020 Thana- BUXAR District- Buxar
======================================================

Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Kumar Singh, aged about 20 years (M), Son of Sunil Singh, Resident of Village - Mahdah, PS- Buxar (M), District- Buxar.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Dr. Kamal Deo Sharma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 26-02-2021

Heard Dr. Kamal Deo Sharma, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr. Choubey Jawahar, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

Buxar (Town) PS Case No. 52 of 2020 dated 31.01.2020, instituted

under Sections 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner, though not

named in the FIR, is that he was in the business of stealing of

motorcycle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he

was not caught and also no recovery has been made from his house

of any incriminating material, much less any motorcycle. It was Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31842 of 2020 dt.26-02-2021

submitted that co-accused Shivam Kumar whose confessional

statement has implicated the petitioner is of the same village as the

petitioner and due to local rivalry, he has named him. It was

submitted that the petitioner had two other criminal cases against

him but since both with regard to allegation of abduction of a girl

which is false as he is living with that girl.

5. Learned APP submitted that the co-accused Shivam

Kumar as well as Dhiraj Yadav have taken the petitioner's name

and the specific allegation is that the petitioner was in the business

of sealing motorcycle from before. It was submitted that there is

absolutely no believable reason as to why a co-villager would be

implicated falsely.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court

is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

Anand Kr.

AFR/NAFR U T