Patna High CourtCR. MISC./6696/2024bail rejected

Imran Alam @ Ibran Alam v. The State Of Bihar

2024-08-21Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6696 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-383 Year-2023 Thana- RAMNAGAR District- West Champaran ====================================================== Imran Alam @ Ibran Alam S/o Sk. Kasinder @ Sk. Kalindra R/o VillBargajwa, Ward no.- 15, P.S.- Ram Nagar, Dist.- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Akhileshwar Kumar Shrivastva, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP For the Informant :

Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Govind Mohan Thakur, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 21-08-2024 Heard learned counsels for the parties.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Ram Nagar P.S. Case No. 383 of 2023 registered under Sections 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per prosecution case, this petitioner tried many times to commit rape with the deceased, and when the petitioner did not succeed, he along with other accused persons under conspiracy committed murder of the deceased, and the dead body was buried with a view to conceal the evidence.

4. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that informant is not the eye witness of the case and only on suspicion, petitioner has been made accused in this case. The First Information Report has been lodged after an inordinate

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6696 of 2024(8) dt.21-08-2024 2/2 delay of one week. The police after investigation has submitted charge-sheet. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail by contending that from bare perusal of the F.I.R., there is specific allegation against this petitioner that he tried so many times to commit rape upon the deceased. Petitioner has played an active and positive role, which compelled the deceased to commit suicide. Hence, he does not deserve to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

6. Having considered the nature of accusation and the gravity of offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) utkarsh/- U T