Saddam Ansari @ Saddam Hussain v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46118 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-642 Year-2016 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Saddam Ansari @ Saddam Hussain Son of Muktar Miyan @ Muktar Ansari Resident of Vill- Chailahan Tal, P.S.- Banjariya, District- East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State .
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 367, 371 , 430 , 406 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code .
3 . As per the prosecution case , the maternal uncle of informant namely, Mukhtar Mian and his son namely, Sadam Ansari (petitioner ) fradulently took her husband namely Nasrullah Ansari to Kuwait and handed over him to broker.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46118 of 2024(2) dt.06-08-2024 2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely been implicated in this case due to village politics. There is no chit of paper on record in support of the allegation against the petitioner. As a matter of fact, petitioner is son of co-accused, Mukhtar Miyan, and both of them are relative to the husband of the informant. The husband of the informant took a loan of Rs. 20,000 from the father of the petitioner, namely, Mukhtar Miyan, with an assurance to return the same within three months. And after three months, the father of the petitioner requested to return the same but the informant became aggrieved and lodged the present case against the petitioner and his father with false allegation. It is lastly submitted that the matter has already been compromised between the parties for which a compromise petition has been filed before the Court below i. e,. Annexure P/2 to the bail petition . Petitioner claims clean antecedent.
5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the bail petition of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of arrest or surrender within six weeks from today, let the petitioner, as named above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46118 of 2024(2) dt.06-08-2024 3/3 two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate , East Champaran at Motihari in connection with Turkauliya (Banjariya) P.S. case No. 642 of 2016 , subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure .
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Koushik/- U T