Md. Adil Hussain v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11312 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-197 Year-2021 Thana- AMAUR District- Purnia ====================================================== Md. Adil Hussain Son Of Md. Najir @ Najir Uddin Resident Of VillageRaselli, Ward No. 3, P.O. Bisan, P.S. Amour, District- Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Udbhav For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Bilash Roy Raman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 03-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Amour P.S. Case No.197 of 2021, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 472, 473, 474 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner and one another co-accused are said to have withdrawn money from the bank account of the customers by making duplicate finger print. The police recovered laptop, Aadhar Card, mobile phone etc. from the house of co-accused. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that no incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner is made accused in the present case on the basis of confessional statement of co-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11312 of 2022(2) dt.03-08-2022 2/2 accused. It is submitted that the co-accused disclosed the name of the petitioner as one of the members of the syndicate who withdraws the money from the bank account of the customers by making duplicate finger print. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that many articles have been recovered from the house of the coaccused and he disclosed the name of the petitioner that the petitioner is also a member of the syndicate involved in withdrawing the money from the bank account of the customers by making duplicate finger print.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Sanjay/- U T