Sagir Ahmad @ Sagir Ali @ Sagir Alam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6430 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-87 Year-2023 Thana- DUMARIYA District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Sagir Ahmad @ Sagir Ali @ Sagir Alam S/O Karu Miyan @ Ummat Rasul R/O Village- Salaiya, P.S- Dumariya, Distt.- Gaya. 2.

Rustam Ali S/o Kabir Ali R/o vill-Salaiya, P.S-Dumariya, Distt.-Gaya. 3.

Shahrukh Ali @ Md. Shahrukh Ali S/o Kabir Ali R/o vill-Salaiya, P.SDumariya, Distt.-Gaya. 4.

Raunak Ali @ Mustafa Ajij S/o Kabir Ali R/o vill-Salaiya, P.S-Dumariya, Distt.-Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate Mr. Krishna Prabhat, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dinesh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 17-02-2024 Heard Ld. counsel for the Petitioners and Ld. APP for the State.

2. The Petitioners apprehend their arrest, in connection with Dumariya P.S. Case No. 87 of 2023, dated 31.07.2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 323, 153(A), 332, 427, 333, 295(A), 353, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case as emerges from the FIR is that the Petitioners took Law in their hands and also obstructed the Police party from discharging their official duty.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6430 of 2024(2) dt.17-02-2024 2/3

4. Ld. counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the allegation against the Petitioners is false and fabricated and they have not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He also submits that similarly situated co-accused Rahul Kumar, Sanjay Soni, Gautam Kumar, Shekhu and Sonu Kumar have got anticipatory bail vide order dated 10.01.2024 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 81021, by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

5. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one in the instant case.

6. However, Ld. APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner for bail.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this application is allowed, directing the Petitioners, abovenamed, to be enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order, on their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Ld. Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sherghati at

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6430 of 2024(2) dt.17-02-2024 3/3 Gaya, in connection Dumariya P.S. Case No. 87 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. and the following conditions:

(i) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that the Petitioners have given wrong statement regarding his criminal antecedents, Ld. court below shall cancel the bail bond of the Petitioners after hearing them and getting satisfied that the Petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents despite his knowledge of the same.

(ii) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, Ld. court below shall cancel the bail bond of the Petitioners.

8. Ld. counsel for the Petitioners is directed to remove all the defects, if any, pointed out by the office within a period of one month and the Registry is directed to issue the certified copy of this order only after removal of office objections. (Jitendra Kumar, J) chandan/- U T