Firoz @ Mohamad Firoz Alam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49602 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-789 Year-2021 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad ====================================================== FIROZ @ MOHAMAD FIROZ ALAM SON OF SANAULLAH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- ERKI, PS- JEHANABAD, DIST- JEHANABAD ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Umesh Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Renu Kumari, APP.

Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 13-09-2023 Heard learned counsels for the parties.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 147, 341, 323, 504, 379, 427, 354 (B) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Allegedly, all the accused persons entered the house of the informant and started abusing and assaulting her and her daughter. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is that he disconnected the electric connection of the house and took away some wire from there.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. No such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this cased due to ulterior motive. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. There is admitted land dispute

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49602 of 2023(3) dt.13-09-2023 2/2 between the parties. It is further submitted that there is allegation against the petitioner that he suppressed his criminal antecedent is totally false. As the police party has submitted the final form in two cases. Out of the aforesaid two cases the petitioner has already mentioned about one case in para 3 of the bail application.

5. Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant oppose the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner has deliberately suppressed his criminal antecedent. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the informant that the informant has also filed a protest petition, which was pending in the Court below.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, as from perusal of record, it is evident that petitioner has one more criminal antecedent which was not got mentioned in Para 3 of the bail application, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) divyanshi/- U T