Naiyar Imam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27182 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2020 Thana- PARIHAR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== 1.

NAIYAR IMAM Son of Late Muzaffar Imam Resident of Village - Balasat, P.S.- Nanpur, Distt.- Sitamarhi, At Present Of Mohalla - Rajtoli, P.S.- Laheriyasarai, Distt.- Darbhanga.

2.

Laxmi Sah Son of Late Baijnath Sah Resident of Village - Belmohan, P.S.- Pupri, Distt.- Sitamarhi, 3.

Govind Sahani Son of Sukhdeo Sahani Resident of Village - Teliyapokhar, P.S. - Sadar, Distt.- Darbhanga.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Virendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 05-04-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within one month.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned APP for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Parihar P.S. Case No. 07 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 379 of the Indian Penal Code. Informant, Bharat Shahni, lodged FIR stating therein that some unknown thieves stolen away his tractor. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27182 of 2021(3) dt.05-04-2022 2/2 police officials have falsely implicated the present petitioners in this case, as such, the petitioner No. 1 has filed a complaint petition as C.R. No. 50/2019 in the court of C.J.M., Darbhanga. On the other hand, learned Addl. P.P., Mr. Shailendra Kumar, has submitted that the investigation is still going on and the petitioners have several criminal antecedents against them. As such, I do not think it a fit case for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is rejected.

Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioners within the stipulated time provided in para-1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) SONALI/- U T