Md. Abid Wasim @ Abid Waseem v. The State Of Bihar
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49728 of 2017 (3) dt.29-11-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.49728 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -119 Year- 2017 Thana -SIDHWARA District- DARBHANGA ======================================================
1. Md. Abid Wasim @ Abid Waseem, Son of Wasim Ahmad, resident of village- Paigambarpur, P.S. Singhwara, District- Darbhanga. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Shahnawaz Ali For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 29-11-2017 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Singhwara Police Station Case No. 119 of 2017, disclosing offences under Sections 341, 323, 304, 354(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner, who is of clean antecedent, is innocent and has not committed any offence. In fact, the petitioner happens to be government teacher has not committed any overt act rather he has falsely been implicated in this case. No cogent material has come during course of investigation against the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner deserves the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49728 of 2017 (3) dt.29-11-2017 Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and there is direct allegation against the petitioner that he has outraged the modesty of the daughter of the informant and tried to committee rape with her. Moreover, the victim in her statement has also supported the prosecution version. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of this petitioner is rejected.
(Arvind Srivastava, J) brajesh/- U T