Md Tehseen @ Md Tehseen Ahmad @ Tahseen Ahmad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53231 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-120 Year-2015 Thana- BIRPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== Md Tehseen @ Md Tehseen Ahmad @ Tahseen Ahmad S/o Md. Ashafaque Ahmad R/o Ibrahimpur, P.O. Jichho, Police Station Sabaur and District Bhagalpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjeev Verma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 17-05-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Birpur P.S. Case No.120 of 2015, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 466, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner is said to have obtained the job on the basis of forged appointment letter.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the petitioner had been granted anticipatory bail in the year 2016, but he could not surrender within the stipulated period due to his illness. It is submitted that out of 19 accused persons, 18 accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail. It is lastly submitted that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53231 of 2021(2) dt.17-05-2022 2/2 the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph-3 of the bail application.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner had been granted anticipatory bail in the year 2016, but he could not surrender before the learned court below till date, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned court below within a period of four weeks from today and seeks regular bail, the learned court below shall consider the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner preferably on the same day without being prejudiced by this order taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner had earlier been granted anticipatory bail and other co-accused persons have also been enlarged on anticipatory bail.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J.) Sanjay/- U T