Md. Nadeem @ Rizvi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.49693 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -154 Year- 2017 Thana -MANIHARI District- MUZAFFARPUR ======================================================

1. Md. Nadeem @ Rizvi Son of Md. Nayeem Akhtar @ Md. Nayeem, Resident of Village-Hasan Chak Bangra, P.S. Sadar Muzaffarpur, DistrictMuzaffarpur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Devendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Humayou Ahmad Khan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 09-11-2017 Heard the parties.

This application is for grant of regular bail in connection with Maniyari P.S.Case no.154 of 2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 384, 385, 325, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against the petitioner is of demand of extortion from the informant when he was starting construction of the building and further allegation is that he has assaulted the informant also causing injury to him.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that as a matter of fact when he went upon to vacate the shop of the informant, he protested and the present case has been lodged against the petitioner and the petitioner has also lodged a case

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49693 of 2017 (3) dt.09-11-2017 2/2 against the informant with respect to the same. The petitioner is in custody since 1.8.2017.

Heard learned A.P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant. They have opposed the prayer for bail that the petitioner is in the habit of demanding extortion. Earlier also one case had been lodged with respect of demand of extortion from another person for construction of his house. Having heard both sides and in view of facts and circumstances, as stated above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, as such the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected, however, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and once the progress is made in the case, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the learned court below, who will consider the materials available on the record at that time and will pass appropriate order.. With the aforesaid observation, this application is disposed of.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U T