Munna Miya @ Mohammad Salam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25358 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2023 Thana- CHANDRADIP District- Jamui ====================================================== Munna Miya @ Mohammad Salam Son Of Late Mohammad Aslam Ansari Resident of Village- Aliganj, P.S.- Chandradip, Distt- Jamui. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 17-08-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Chandradip P.S. Case No. 7 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 411 & 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Some persons were apprehended by the police for stealing pipes and the name of this petitioner surfaced in this case on the confessional statement of one apprehended person.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that the name of the petitioner transpired in this case on the confessional statement of co-accused which

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25358 of 2023(5) dt.17-08-2023 2/2 has no evidentiary value in the eye of law. It is further submitted that no incriminating article has been recovered either from the house or from the shop of the petitioner. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that considering the nature of the offence, the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail, the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T