Saheb @ Abrar Alam @ Raj Aryan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.41337 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -62 Year- 2016 Thana -CHIRAIYA DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Saheb @ Abrar Alam @ Raj Aryan S/o Sanaullah Resident of villageDhaka Ramchandra, P.S.- Dhaka, Dist.- East Champaran .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sangeet Deokuliar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 29-11-2016 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Chiraiya P.S. Case No. 62/2016, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 387, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Laxmi Narayan Nishad the Headmaster Rajkiya Madhya Vidyalaya, Khartari alleged that three persons came to his school on 04.04.2016 and they disclosed that they have been asked by the Central Team to inspect the school. They started taking photographs and using abusive language against the teachers. The accused persons demanded Rs. 25,000/-, when the informant refused to give money, the accused persons threatened to get him suspended and also send him in jail. The accused persons also

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41337 of 2016 (4) dt.29-11-2016 2/2 gave mobile number. One of the accused called him near Surendra S.P. Petrol Pump and snatched Rs., 1,500/- from his pocket. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not the person who called the informant to Surendra S.P. Petrol Pump and snatched money. Of course, the petitioner has got no authorization to inspect the school, but no specific allegation is made against him.

It appears that petitioner and two other accused persons without having any authority went to the school and took photographs, threatened the teachers including the Headmaster informant of the case and demanded extortion. Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Vinita/- U T