Md. Imran Alam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42849 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-136 Year-2023 Thana- SAHEBPUR KAMAL DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== Md. Imran Alam S/o- Md. Ali, R/o Village- Sanha West, PS- Sahebpur Kamal, Dist- Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-09-2024 Heard Mr. Sanjay Prasad, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Sahebpur Kamal PS Case No. 136 of 2023, FIR dated 20.05.2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 469, 471 and 474 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

According to the prosecution case, the petitioner used forged signature of Mukhiya and stamp of Gram Panchayat for getting birth certificate of one Sahbaz.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case and as per allegation in the FIR, the petitioner has produced forged

2/4 certificate of one Sahbaz and he has put forged signature of Mukhiya in the certificate. He further submits that due to political rivalry, the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Apart from that, without any signature expert (scientific verification) the petitioner has been implicated in the present case. In fact, the petitioner has not put forged signature on the birth certificate of Sahbaz and in addition to that, the coaccused persons namely Anguri Khatoon and Anr., who were the beneficiary of the birth certificate, have been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 24.04.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 23298 of 2024. 5.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the other hand has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner has put forged signature of Mukhiya in the birth certificate, apart from that, petitioner carries three criminal antecedents other than the present, but fairly submits that police has submitted the final form in favour of the petitioner in two cases and in the third case investigation is going on.

6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and mainly the facts that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case without any scientific verification and other

3/4 similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail, let the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial Court, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Begusarai, where the case is pending in connection with Sahebpur Kamal PS Case No. 136 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and also the following conditions: (i). Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the learned trial Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the learned trial Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the learned trial Court.

(ii). If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(iii). And further condition that the learned trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and

4/4 in case, at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the learned trial Court shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Shahnawaz/- U T