Meraz Alam @ Meraj Alam v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29254 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-265 Year-2020 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Meraz Alam @ Meraj Alam Son Of Tauhid Hassan R/O Village- Bangra, P.S.- Sugauli, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sunil Kumar No.Iii For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 17-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Sugauli P.S. Case No. 265 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and subsequently added under Section 302 of the I.P.C., pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari.
3. The petitioner is said to have assaulted the informant upon his neck and chest by means of Farsa.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. There is no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29254 of 2023(2) dt.17-07-2023 2/2 specific overt act against the petitioner. He submits that it does not appear to have sustained injury on the neck and chest of the deceased by farsa, and such allegation alleged in the FIR against the petitioner is false. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of the bail application.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the
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.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T