Patna High CourtCR. MISC./42251/2016rejected

Md. Tanveer v. The State Of Bihar

2016-10-06Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.42251 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -132 Year- 2016 Thana -KOTWALI DistrictMUNGER =====================================

1. Md. Tanveer, S/o Md. Nasim @ Polo, Resident of VillageBardah, P.S. Munger Mufassil, District Munger. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ===================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manendra Kr. Sinha, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Pushpa Sinha, APP ===================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-10-2016 Heard the parties.

This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Kotwali P.S. Case No. 132 of 2016, disclosing offences under Sections 25(1-b)a/26(i) (ii) and 35 of the Arms Act.

In course of a surprise raid conducted by the police, on the basis of secret information, they intercepted and apprehended three persons, including a woman. The fourth person, i.e., the petitioner, is said to have managed to escape.

From the possession of the persons, so

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42251 of 2016 (2) dt.06-10-2016 2/2 apprehended, several tools and articles useful for manufacture of firearms were recovered. One of the persons, arrested by the police, disclosed the name of the petitioner as the fourth person, who had successfully escaped.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in this case only because he is the son of one Md. Nasim, who was apprehended by the police. It has further been submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. However, considering the seriousness of the offence and the fact, as per the allegation, that the petitioner's name was disclosed by his father, who is a conamed accused, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner, above named, the privilege of anticipatory bail. This application is, accordingly, rejected.

The petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and seek regular bail, if so advised. If he does so, his application for regular bail shall be considered by the learned court below on its own merit, without being prejudiced by rejection of present application for grant of anticipatory bail. (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Praveen-II/-c U T