Patna High CourtCR. MISC./55615/2024bail rejected

Md. Gulzar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-08-07Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55615 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-149 Year-2023 Thana- SINGHWARA District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Md. Gulzar SON OF MD. HALIM VILLAGE- RAJO ANSARI MOHALLA, PS- SINGHWARA, DIST- DARBHANGA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kiran Kumari, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 07-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Singhwara P.S. Case No. 149 of 2023 lodged on 01.08.2023 under Section 147/148/149/448/323/324/354/302/504/506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, F.I.R. has been lodged against twelve named accused persons including the present petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel also submits that the date of occurrence is 31.07.2023 whereas F.I.R. has been lodged on 01.08.2023. Counsel submits that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean and there is one

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55615 of 2024(2) dt.07-08-2024 2/2 case pending against him in which he is on bail. The petitioner is in custody since 31.01.2024.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that case diary has been called for. Upon perusal of the case diary, it transpires that the informant has disclosed the name of the petitioner and he was identified in C.C.T.V footage. From bare reading of the F.I.R. allegation of overt-act is also upon the petitioner.

6. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. However, he is at liberty that he may renew his prayer for bail one year after framing of charge. (Dr. Anshuman, J) Sunnykr/- U