IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23739 of 2019

                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2019 Thana- BARUN District-
                                               Aurangabad
                 ======================================================
                 PAPPU KUMAR aged about 33 years, male, S/o Ramvilas Singh Resident of
                 Ward No. 10, Rampur, P.S.- Barun, District- Aurangabad

                                                                          ... ... Petitioner
                                                 Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                                ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner   :  Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate.
                 For the Opposite Party: APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN
                                          ORAL ORDER

2 16-04-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 379, 420, 411/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 4/40 BMMCR, 15 of Pollution Act and 3 of the Damage of Public Property Act registered in connection with Barun P.S. Case No. 52 of 2019.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated merely because he happens to be the owner of one of the tractors bearing Registration No. BR45GAO-877. It is further submitted that the tractor in question had been given to the driver namely Arvind Singh on payment of Rs. 700/- per day to the petitioner. However the tractor was not carrying sand rather it was carrying some soil meant for filling of land. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23739 of 2019(2) dt.16-04-2019 2/2

4. Having regard to the nature of accusations, gravity of the offence alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed.

5. If the petitioner surrenders and seeks regular bail before the learned trial Court the same shall be considered on its own merits in accordance with law and without being prejudiced by any observation in the present order.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar//-

U          T