Neyaz Khan @ Neyaz Ahmad @ Neyaz Ahmad Khan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.7142 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -212 Year- 2016 Thana -RAMNAGAR DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ====================================================== Neyaz Khan @ Neyaz Ahmad @ Neyaz Ahmad Khan, S/o Late Sagir Ahmad Khan, Resident of Village- Tilanghi, P.S.- Bairia, District- West Champaran. .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar. .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh-1, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Panchanand Pandit (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 29-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and also learned counsel for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Ramnagar P.S. Case No. 212 of 2016, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 447, 323, 385, 379, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Allegedly, Khalid Anwar @ Guddu Khan had demanded ransom of Rs. 5,000/- from the informant and due to non-fulfillment he, the petitioner and other came at the door of the informant and attacked being variously armed, Neyaz Khan (petitioner) snatched gold chain valuing Rs. 25,000/- and Thag Khan took out Rs. 5,000/- from the pocket, they caused threats to kill the informant, if case will be lodged, there was attempt for compromise but Khalid Anwar was not ready for compromise. Submission is of false implication and that no offence
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7142 of 2017 (4) dt.29-03-2017 2/2 as alleged is made out against the petitioner. The petitioner has been made victim of the circumstances, he has not taken out any gold chain, during investigation the witnesses have not supported the allegation regarding snatching of gold chain, the petitioner has been made accused in another case after this case and, as such, the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration. The learned A.P.P. duly assisted by the learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer of pre-arrest bail. In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering that occurrence is of 11.09.2016 whereas F.I.R. has been lodged on 18.09.
2016, during investigation the witnesses have not supported the allegation regarding snatching of gold chain and, as such, the petitioner in the event of his arrest or surrender within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Ramnagar, Bagha, in connection with Ramnagar P.S. Case No. 212 of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down in section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Rajiv/- U T