Patna High CourtCR. MISC./14048/2017rejected

Dilshad Quraishi @ Dilshad v. The State Of Bihar

2017-05-24Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.14048 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -189 Year- 2016 Thana -HASPURA District- AURANGABAD ====================================================== Dilshad Quraishi @ Dilshad (Driver of Truck No. UP- 17T- 0441) S/o Khaleel Kuraishi Resident of Village- Barnawa, Post Office, Barnawa, Police Station- Binauli, District- Baghpat, State Uttar Pradesh. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ahmad Ali, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 24-05-2017 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Haspura P.S. Case No. 189/2016, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 429, 295(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 4, 4(2) of Bihar Prevention of Improvement of Animal Act, section 38(3) of Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act and sections 43(1)(2)(3), 48, 49(1)(2) of Transportation of Cattle Act. The informant got information that some persons were carrying animal flesh on truck bearing registration no. UP17T-0441 and a pick-up van bearing no. BR-02AA-0434. On such raid was conducted and the vehicle was seized. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14048 of 2017 (2) dt.24-05-2017 2/2 petitioner is the driver of the vehicle. He was simply driving the vehicle on the order of owner of the vehicle. Similarly situated coaccused persons have already been enlarged on anticipatory bail vide order passed in Cr. Misc. 51834/2016 and one co-accused granted regular bail vide order passed in Cr. Misc. 51494/2016, but it appears that the persons who have been granted anticipatory bail were suspected to have been loaded Beef and animal flesh on the truck, but it was the petitioner who was driving the vehicle and he fled away after seeing the police.

Considering the facts aforesaid and nature of allegation made against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) Vinita/- U T