Mohammad Kaiyum v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42405 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-290 Year-2018 Thana- KISHANPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== MOHAMMAD KAIYUM S/O MOHAMMAD MUSTAQUE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MADHURA, WARD NO. 04, P.O. - RAJPUR PANCHAYAT RAJPUR, PS. KISHANPUR, DIST. SUPAUL ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bhim Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 08-08-2023
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 464(A), 363, 371, 368, 504, 367, 370(A), 363(A), 354, 354(B), 323 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent.
4. The informant alleges that the accused persons came and misbehaved with her and also disrobed her and took her son forcefully and demanded ransom of Rs.50,000/- for releasing her son failing which he would be killed.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the date of occurrence is 17.09.2018 and the complaint came to be filed on 29.09.2018 i.e. after a delay of 11 days. It is further submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42405 of 2023(2) dt.08-08-2023 2/2 petitioner was not named in the complaint petition. It is next submitted that the present FIR arises out of the complaint filed by the complainant. It is thus submitted that initially a delayed complaint was filed so that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is not investigated promptly by the police. It is also submitted at the cost of repetition that petitioner is not named in the FIR and is a person with clean antecedent.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Kishanpur P.S. Case No. 290 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T