Patna High CourtCR. MISC./6920/2021bail rejected

Moujo @ Mujmil Alam @ Mujmil v. The State Of Bihar

2022-01-27Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6920 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-218 Year-2020 Thana- KOCHADHAMAN District- Kishanganj ====================================================== MOUJO @ MUJMIL ALAM @ MUJMIL SON OF ALAM @ MD. ALAM R/O VILLAGE- KANJHAIYABARI, P.S.- KOCHADHAMAN, DIST.- KISHANGANJ ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Md. Hussain For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Pushpa Sinha-1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 27-01-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within one month.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State through video conferencing. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Kochadhaman P.S. Case No. 218 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325, 308, 354, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation, hot exchange took place between the informant, Najmin Begum with her mother-in-law, Jubeda Khatoon, then the petitioner abused the informant and the other accused persons named in the FIR attacked on her. The

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6920 of 2021(3) dt.27-01-2022 2/2 allegation against the petitioner is that he assaulted the injured with handle of axe and she sustained head injuries. Considering the allegations made in the FIR the legible photo stat copy of injury report was called for vide order dated 15.12.2021 which has been received and has been annexed with record as 'flag-Y'. It shows that the injured Najmin Begum has received altogether five injuries on her person and injury No. 5 which is attributed to the present petitioner is grievous in nature.

Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, petitioner does not appear entitled to privilege of anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected.

Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioner within the stipulated time provided in para-1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey , J) SONALI/- U T