← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./38907/2016rejected

Bhulla Mian @ Md. Hadees Ansari @ Hadees Ansari And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2016-10-06Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.38907 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -45 Year- 2015 Thana -SHARGHAT District- MADHUBANI ======================================================

1. Bhulla Mian @ Md. Hadees Ansari @ Hadees Ansari, son of Kodai Ansari @ Bhadi Mian.

2. Allauddin, son of Iddriss Kujra.

Both resident of Village Minti, P.S. Saharghat, District- Madhubani. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER ------------ 06-10-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Saharghat P.S. Case No.45 of 2015 registered under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Benipatti, Madhubani.

The accusation is that Mauji Das, the son of the informant, Mohini Devi, was of unsound mind and he used to do the work with the petitioners and two others of mason. The son of the informant had gone to take wages and do the work of mason with the petitioners and two others but he did not return. Later on,

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38907 of 2016 (2) dt.06-10-2016 2/2 the dead body of the son of the informant was recovered. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence and on mere suspicion, she has falsely implicated the petitioners and two others in this case.

Having considered the facts and the circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioners, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. However, the petitioners are directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks from today and pray for regular bail, which shall be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T