Patna High CourtCR. MISC./36902/2020dismissed

Mahtab Alam @ Mahtab v. The State Of Bihar

2021-02-02Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36902 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2020 Thana- JOKIHAT DistrictAraria ====================================================== Mahtab Alam @ Mahtab S/o Late Aiyub R/o village- Baghmara, P.S.- Jokihat, District- Araria ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Mukesh Kumar Rana, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Pradip Narain Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 02-02-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an undertaking to remove all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter as and when required. It is accordingly directed that all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter be removed within one month hereof.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 17.08.2020 in connection with Jokihat P.S. Case No. 113 of 2020 for the offences alleged under Sections 379, 382, 511/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in connection with attempt to commit theft in the godown of the informant. It is submitted that a petty dispute arose between the parties in course of purchasing goods from the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36902 of 2020(2) dt.02-02-2021 2/2 kirana shop of the informant.

4. Learned APP, on the other hand, opposes the bail petition, submitting that the petitioner tried to escape on motorcycle by pointing pistol, but on being accosted by the informant, managed to escape leaving the motorcycle behind, which has been recovered from the spot. The petitioner is accused in four prior cases of similar nature.

5. Having regard to the nature of accusations, gravity of the offence alleged as well as criminal antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner. The bail petition stands dismissed.

6. Office shall follow-up to ensure that all defects are removed and compliance with the notices of this Court are made by the petitioner within the stipulated time provided in para-1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar//- U T