Akhtar Khan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40537 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2019 Thana- KUCHILA District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Akhtar Khan, Son of Kaimu Khan @ Kaimuddin Khan Resident of VillageMukhrama, P.S.- Kuchila, District- Kaimur. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shyameshwar Dayal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 03-07-2019 Heard leaned counsel for the petitioner and the leaned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Kuchila P.S. Case No. 02 of 2019, registered under Sections 302, 120(B), 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of the A.C.J.M-III, Kaimur at Bhabhua.

The accusation is that on 28.01.2019, on hearing the sound of firing, the informant woke up and saw in the light of bulb that the petitioner was fleeing from her roof having pistol in his hand and her husband has sustained firearm injury at his right temporal region. On raising alarm, all family members reached there. The cause of occurrence is that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40537 of 2019(2) dt.03-07-2019 2/2 petitioner had illicit relation with the daughter of the brotherin-law of the informant and protest was made by the family members of the informant.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case as in course of investigation the informant, in his restatement, gave contradictory statement saying that she was informed by her son regarding fleeing of petitioner. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of office, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial Court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial Court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T