Imran Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.139 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-281 Year-2018 Thana- BEUR District- Patna ====================================================== Imran Ansari, Son of Rafique Mian, Resident of village - Bamngsawa, P.SSurth, District-Deoghar (Jharkhand) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL ORAL ORDER 15-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66 of the Information Technology Act.

Petitioner along with other F.I.R. named accused persons are said to be indulged in cheating the persons in the name of lottery and also cheated Rs. 9 lacs of the informant in the name of lottery for providing him Scorpio, LCD TV and Rs.1 lac getting the aforesaid amount deposited in the account of several accused persons and the petitioner also demanded further Rs. 1 lac from the informant by his mobile phone and was apprehended from the spot fixed for meeting with the informant.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.139 of 2019(4) dt.15-02-2019 2/3 It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is quite innocent. He has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in the case by his neighbour Md. Jabibula Ansari by asking him to collect Rs.1 lac from the informant. Petitioner had no knowledge of his earlier antics. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. He has been languishing in custody since 11.09.2018.

On the other hand, learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the petitioner happens to be member of the syndicate indulged in cheating gullible persons relieving them of their hard earned money. There is specific evidence against the petitioner in the case diary and petitioner has also demanded further Rs.1 lac from the informant by his mobile phone and was apprehended from the place fixed for meeting with the informant. Hence he does not deserve bail.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

However, learned Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within nine months from the date of receipt or production of a copy of this

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.139 of 2019(4) dt.15-02-2019 3/3 order and S.S.P., Patna is directed to ensure the production of the witnesses in the case on each and every date fixed without fail.

Let a copy of this order be communicated to S.S.P., Patna by fax for needful.

(Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J) mantreshwar/- U T