Mumtaz Jauhar v. The State Of Bihar And ANR.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19070 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2517 Year-2016 Thana- MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== MUMTAZ JAUHAR Son of Md. Abdullah, Resident of Village-Manohar Chapra, P.S.-Bararaj, District-Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar and Anr. Bihar 2.

Arif Khan Son of Md. Jan Khan, Resident of Mohalla-Faizullah Khan, Jan Manzil near Khankah, Laheria Saraye P.S.-Laheriyasarai, DistrictDarbhanga. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.S. Jamil Akhtar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rina Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 20-08-2019 This application has been filed for cancellation of the bail granted to the O.P.no.2 , vide order dated 4.1.2019 passed by the learned A.D.J.-XIV, Muzaffarpur in A.B.P.no.3757 of 2018.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that without hearing the complainant, order has passed and the matter was reported by the complainant to the High Court in administrative side also.

From perusal of the order, it appears that the laundered Addl. Sessions Judge has granted anticipatory bail to the O.P.no.2 on the ground that the co-accused Fahim Ahmad and others have already been granted anticipatory bail in ABP

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19070 of 2019(2) dt.20-08-2019 2/2 No.3378 of 2018 dated 5.11.2018 and the case of the Opposite Party No.2 is on similar footing that of the co-accused Fahim Ahmad and others and no doubt the order does not disclose whether he has heard the complainant or not but considering the fact that the case of the O.P.no.2 is similar to the other coaccused persons who has already been granted anticipatory bail and that has not been challenged by the complainant and there is no allegation of either tempering with the evidence or suppression of fact or there is chance of absconding of the O.P.no.2 In such view of the matter, I am not inclined to interfere with the order granting bail to the O.P.no.2. Hence, this application is dismissed.

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