Patna High CourtCR. MISC./54039/2018dismissed

Md. Razi Alam @ Razi Alam v. The State Of Bihar

2018-09-11Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.54039 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-197 Year-2018 Thana- ARARIA District- Araria ====================================================== Md. Razi Alam @ Razi Alam, Son of Late Shamim Alam, resident of VillageAdarsh Nagar, Ward No. 16, Police Station- Araria, District- Araria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Sri N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate Sri Sanjeet Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-09-2018 Heard Sri N.K. Agrawal, learned senior counsel, assisted by Sri Sanjeet Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner. None appeared on behalf of the State.

The sole petitioner, apprehending his arrest in connection with Araria P.S. Case No. 197 of 2018, G.R. No. 1018 of 2018 registered for the offence under Section 147/148/149/341/323/325/337/307/427/504/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 27 of the Arms Act , 1959, has prayed for grant of bail in the event of his arrest or surrender. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner tried to persuade the court that in a land dispute false case has been instituted by the informant of the present case. He further submits that in petitions filed by some of the other co-accused

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54039 of 2018(2) dt.11-09-2018 2/2 for grant of anticipatory bail case diary has been called for. Besides hearing, I have perused the materials available on record. In the F.I.R. there is specific accusation against the petitioner. Meaning thereby, that petitioner is the main assailant. Since in the F.I.R. there is specific accusation, there is no reason for summoning case diary. Besides this, on perusal of the statement made in paragraph - 3 of the petition it appears that on earlier occasion also three cases were instituted against the petitioner.

Considering the antecedent of the petitioner as well as direct accusation against petitioner in the present case, there is no reason for entertaining the anticipatory bail petition. The petition stands dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) praful/- U T