Hafiz Miyan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31579 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2023 Thana- BAIRIYA District- West Champaran ====================================================== HAFIZ MIYAN SON OF JAHAR MIYAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGEFATUCHAPRA, PS- BAIRIYA, DISTT- WEST CHAMPARAN ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Umesh Kumar Gupta For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Lalan Kumar For the Informant : Mr. Akash Anand ====================================================== 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 assisted by learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Bairiya P.S. Case No.1 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307 & 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, West Champaran at Bettiah.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he gave farsa blow to one Raiful Azam sustaining grievous injury to him.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31579 of 2023(2) dt.17-07-2023 2/2 falsely implicated in this case due to land dispute. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. There is admitted land dispute between the parties. Both sides have filed cases against each other. The injury sustained by the victim is grievous in nature. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.
5. Learned APP for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that considering the nature of the injury petitioner does not deserve bail.
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.
7. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail, the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T