Patna High CourtCR. MISC./15501/2017rejected

Md. Rahman @ Rahman v. The State Of Bihar

2017-07-11Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.15501 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -193 Year- 2016 Thana -NATHNAGAR District- BHAGALPUR ====================================================== Md. Rahman @ Rahman, S/o Md. Shaid Mistry, resident of Mohalla - Chamar Toli, P.S. - Nath Nagar, Distt. - Bhagalpur. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Kamal Nayan For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jai Narain Thakur ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 11-07-2017 Heard leaned counsel for the petitioner and the leaned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Nath Nagar P.S. Case No. 193 of 2016, registered under Sections 457, 380 and 401 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur. The accusation is that after taking the dinner informant Asjad @ Munna was sleeping in his house and at about 2.00 P.M. he heard some sound then he woke up and saw that his neighbour Md. Rahman (Petitioner) and Md. Furkhan fleeing through stairs having mobile in their hands. In the meantime, his family members also woke up and it was detected that mobile sets of his family members and cash of Rs. 2000/- was stolen

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.15501 of 2017 (2) dt.11-07-2017 2/2 from the pocket of the informant.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in course of investigation the looted mobile sets are said to be recovered from the possession of the Arsad belonging to the same village, but with ulterior motive petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trail Court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial Court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T