Md. Iftakhar @ Iftakhar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55107 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-281 Year-2024 Thana- ARARIA District- Araria ====================================================== Md. Iftakhar @ Iftakhar son of Late Abdul Mannan Village- bansbari W.No-9, Ps- Araria Dist- Araria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Rama Nand Poddar Mr. Rahul Kumar Mishra For the Informant :

Mr. Nishant Choudhary Mr. Madhav Jha For the State :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 14-08-2024 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Araria P.S. Case No. 281 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307, 379, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per allegation, when the informant was returning from his house and reached near AIR Bhatta, the petitioner along with three accused persons came there. Thereafter, the petitioner and co-accused Md. Sajid assaulted him with iron rod on his head. Co-accused Akram assaulted him with knife and further, co-accused Managir Islam snatched Rs. 25,000/- and two mobile sets at the point of pistol.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55107 of 2024(2) dt.14-08-2024 2/2

4. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case due to previous enmity. He has further submitted that no independent witnesses have supported the prosecution case. The petitioner is under custody since 09.06.2024.

5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner and co-accused Md. Sajid attempted on life of the informant and as many as six injuries were found on his person.

6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances as well as the gravity of the allegation and also the fact that the petitioner has a criminal antecedent, I do not think it to be a fit case for bail, which is hereby rejected.

7. However, the petitioner, if so advised, may renew his prayer for bail after remaining under custody for a period of six months. The prayer for bail may be renewed in the court below itself.

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