Manzar Imam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13158 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2018 Thana- MASHRAK District- Saran ====================================================== Manzar Imam S/o Faiyaz Ahmad Khan @ Md. Faiyaz Ahmad Khan R/o vill - Arna, P.S. - Masrak, Distt. - Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Hazra Praveen @ Hazra Khatoon W/o Ayub Khan R/o vill - Arna, P.S. - Masrak, Distt. - Saran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Md Anis Akhtar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mithlesh Kumar Khare ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-03-2024 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Md. Anis Akhtar and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366A, 376, 323, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that a specific pleading has been made at para-8 of the anticipatory bail application that the petitioner and the OP No. 2 got married, but subsequently, the OP No. 2 left the petitioner and performed her second marriage with Rajudin Khan and is living with her second husband. 4.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13158 of 2024(2) dt.18-03-2024 2/2 5.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Masrak P.S. Case No. 98 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

6.

However, the complainant shall be at liberty to file an application before this court seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner in the event if the petitioner has obtained the bail by misleading this court, in the nature of submission made and recorded hereinabove, i.e., if the complainant has not performed her second marriage with Rajudin Khan in that event she would be at liberty to seek cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner. (Satyavrat Verma, J) SUMIT/- U T