Ali Reza @ Md. Ali Reza @ Ali Raza v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58344 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-136 Year-2016 Thana- KEWATI District- Darbhanga ====================================================== ALI REZA @ MD. ALI REZA @ ALI RAZA Son of Late Manzoor Resident of Village - Barhi Pokhar Tola, P.S.- Keoti, Dist.- Darbhanga. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sarva Deo Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Prem Kumar Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 26-09-2019 This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Keoti P.S. Case No. 136 of 2016, disclosing offences under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 324, 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

It appears that the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner has already been dismissed vide order dated08.05.2018 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 15235 of 2018. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner has been renewed on the ground that earlier cognizance was taken against the petitioner, which was quashed but later on cognizance was again taken against the petitioner and it is a case of communal riot and injuries caused to the informant by hard and blunt substance.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58344 of 2019(3) dt.26-09-2019 2/2 Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and on perusal of the records, it appears that the order taking cognizance against the petitioner was quashed without assigning any reason, as such, learned Magistrate was directed to pass order afresh and in view of that cognizance has again been taken against the petitioner and further this court after considering the materials available on record has allowed privilege of anticipatory bail to some of the co-accused and dismissed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, as such, I am not inclined to reconsider the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail and the same is, accordingly dismissed.

Petitioner is directed to surrender in the court below and pray for regular bail, which will be disposed of by the court below on the merit of the case, without being prejudiced by the order rejecting the anticipatory bail application.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunilkumar/- U T