Alamgir Ansari @ Md. Alamgir And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7235 of 2016 (3) dt.12-04-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.7235 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -119 Year- 2015 Thana -SHIKARPUR DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ======================================================

1. Alamgir Ansari @ Md. Alamgir

2. Saddam Ansari @ Saddam Hussain, Both are S/o Majid ansari, R/o Village - Hingulahar, P.S. - Sathi, District- West Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Adv. Mr. Ram Adya Singh, Adv.

For the Informant : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 12-04-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 341, 323, 307, 506, 509, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act registered in connection with Shikarpur P.S. Case No. 119 of 2015.

3. It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated who are students and were not present at the place of occurrence at the relevant time. It is submitted that there are adequate materials to support the claim that the petitioner no. 1 had travelled on a confirm ticket on 13.03.2015 from Anand Bihar Terminal to Katihar in order to

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7235 of 2016 (3) dt.12-04-2016 appear for an examination at Katihar being held on 15.03.2015. Similarly, petitioner no. 2 is the student at Aligarh Muslim University and had been attending classes from 11.03.2015 to 14.03.2015.

4. Learned APP assisted by learned counsel for the informant appearing suo motu, on the other hand, have opposed the petition, submitting that the informant is the victim himself who is an eye witness to the entire occurrence and has made specific accusation of firing by the petitioners. It is further stated that co-accused Rizwan Ansari and Imran Ansari who are said to have caught hold of the informant when the petitioners being the alleged main assailants fired upon the informant, have been denied anticipatory bail by this Court.

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

(Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/- U T