Md. Salim And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.26695 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -14 Year- 2016 Thana -BALRAMPUR District- KATIHAR ======================================================
1. Md. Salim son of Md. Tahir
2. Md. Aslam son of Salim
3. Md. Noorul @ Md. Nooruddin son of Late Hasibul Rahman
4. Md. Moin @ Md. Moin Alam son of Late Faimuddin
5. Md. Nasimuddi @ Hasim son of Late Jamaluddin
6. Md. Naimuddin son of Taiyab
7. Md. fakrul @ Md. Fakhrul Islam son of Naimuddin
8. Md. Nazar @ Md. Nazarul Islam @ Nazirul Islam son of Taiyab
9. Md. Mofiz @ Md. Mobin son of Qaimuddin All resident of Village- Silampur,Police Station- Balrampur,DistrictKatihar
10. Md. Asgar @ Aaghar Alam son of Md. Hashim Resident of villagePolice Station- Balrampur,District-Katihar .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Najeeb Ahmad For the Opposite Party/s : Sri Mithilesh Kumar Khare ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 01-07-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and counsel for the State.
The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Balrampur P.S. Case No. 14 of 2016 for offence under Sections 147, 149, 341, 342, 379, 353, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
An allegation has been made in the First Information Report that the Informant had gone for the purpose of
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26695 of 2016 (2) dt.01-07-2016 measurement and discharge his official duty but, the people of the locality including the above named petitioners surrounded him, misbehaved and an allegation has been made of assault. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is a case of land dispute between the landlord and the tenants and just for implicating the petitioners, they have been made party including their family inmates.
Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners, above named, is rejected.
However, if the petitioners surrender before the court below within a period of three weeks from today, the court below shall pass order in accordance with law on the same day of their surrender.
(Shivaji Pandey, J) Rishi/- U T