Md. Irshad And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9641 of 2016 (2) dt.13-04-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.9641 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -210 Year- 2015 Thana -PUPRI District- SITAMARHI ======================================================

1. Md. Irshad, S/O Md. Hanif.

2. Md. Saddam, S/o Md. Hanif, Both resident of village- Balutola Bachharpur, P.S.- Pupri, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. T.N.Thakur (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 13-04-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Pupri P.S. Case No. 210 of 2015 registered under Sections 147, 341, 323, 324, 307, 379, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the court of S.D.J.M., Pupri at Sitamarhi. The accusation is that informant, Aftab Hussain @ Amir, was returning to his house on motorcycle along with villager Jahid but in the way, petitioner no.1 made request to him to accompany him for his house. When the petitioner got down to the motorcycle at that time ten persons named in the F.I.R. including the petitioner no. 2 came there and made complaint

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9641 of 2016 (2) dt.13-04-2016 about not giving ransom. Thereafter, all started to assault him with fist and slaps. In that course, petitioners gave knife blow at him and co-accused, Wasim and Ujal took cash of Rs. 5000/- to his pocket. Thereafter, informant rushed to P.H.C., Pupri and from there he was referred to Sadar Hospital, Sitamarhi for better treatment.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to ulterior motive and he has no criminal antecedent.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioners 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) Bhardwaj/- U T