Patna High CourtCR. MISC./45569/2016rejected

Mohammad Meraj @ Md. Meraj Alam v. The State Of Bihar

2017-01-09Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45569 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -120 Year- 2016 Thana -PUPRI District- SITAMARHI ====================================================== MOHAMMAD MERAJ @ MD. MERAJ ALAM Son of Md. Hakim @ Md. Abdul Hakim, resident of Village- Musaidha (Choraut), P.S.- Pupri, District- Sitamarhi.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hans Lal Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 09-01-2017 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Pupri P.S. Case No. 120/2016, registered for the offences punishable under Section 307 and other sections of the Indian Penal Code. The informant alleged that petitioner Md. Meraj and Afroz having armed with Farsa and Sword came and assaulted him on his head and also took out different articles from his house. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner and others are agnates of the informant. Two persons are alleged to have assaulted the informant with Farsa and Sword, but only one injury is found on the head of the informant. Injury is opined to be caused by hard and blunt object. The case is compromised.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45569 of 2016 (4) dt.09-01-2017 2/2 On the other hand, Mr. Ashhar Mustafa learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.P.P. vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that no compromise is arrived at between the parties. It was the petitioner who assaulted the informant with Farsa on his head and the injury is opined to be dangerous to life. It appears that a compromise petition is filed along with the bail petition, but the same is of Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 482/2016, the present case in which the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail is Pupri P.S. Case No. 120/2016. There is specific allegation against the petitioner that he assaulted the informant with Farsa on his head and the injury opined to be dangerous to life.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) Vinita/- U T