Patna High CourtCR. MISC./25458/2017rejected

Md. Quddus And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2017-10-31Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25458 of 2017 (6) dt.31-10-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.25458 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -36 Year- 2017 Thana -MAHESI District- SAHARSA ======================================================

1. Md. Quddus S/o Md. Sadique

2. Md. Samim @ Md. Salim S/o Md. Quddus Both Resident of VillageLakhuar, P.S.- Mahishi, District- Saharsa. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Rajeev Nayan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 31-10-2017 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Mahishi Police Station Case No. 36 of 2017, disclosing offences under Sections 341, 323, 324, 354B, 379, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners, who are of clean antecedent, are innocent and have not committed any offence. In fact, the occurrence took place on 15.03.2017 whereas the F.I.R. has been lodged on 17.03.2017 without explaining the plausible delay. There is general and omnibus allegation against these petitioners. Hence, the petitioners deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25458 of 2017 (6) dt.31-10-2017 Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of these petitioners and submitted that these petitioners have assaulted the informant and her husband and tried to torn the cloth of the informant and taken away cash and ornaments of the informant.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of these petitioners is rejected.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) brajesh/- U T