Manzoor Ansari @ Manzoor Alam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13578 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-171 Year-2021 Thana- PAHARPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Manzoor Ansari @ Manzoor Alam Son Of Late Israil Ansari @ Md. Israil R/O Village- Rajepur, P.S.- Govindganj, District- East Champaran 2.

Ramjan Ansari Son Of Late Israil Ansari @ Md. Israil R/O Village- Rajepur, P.S.- Govindganj, District- East Champaran 3.

Babujan Ansari Son Of Late Israil Ansari @ Md. Israil R/O VillageRajepur, P.S.- Govindganj, District- East Champaran 4.

Musmat Narsuba Khatoon @ Narsoob Khatoon Wife Of Late Israil Ansari @ Md. Israil R/O Village- Rajepur, P.S.- Govindganj, District- East Champaran 5.

Bhirgun Ram Son Of Bhola Ram R/O Village- Mishrawaliya, P.S.- Govindganj, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Shrivastava For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 30-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes to remove the defects within three weeks. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per FIR, all the accused persons including the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13578 of 2022(4) dt.30-08-2022 2/2 petitioners sold the purchased land of the informant by forging documents.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the petitioners have not executed the land of the informant through registered sale deed. He submits that the alleged offence is purely civil dispute. He further submits that petitioners have no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of this application.

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioners had sold the land of the informant.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, their prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected in connection with Paharpur P.S. Case No. 171 of 2021. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) devendra/- U T