Md. Mokhtar Ansari @ Mukhtar Anasari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51941 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-137 Year-2019 Thana- KURSAKANTA District- Araria ====================================================== 1.

Md. Mokhtar Ansari @ Mukhtar Anasari, Male, aged about 34 years, Son of Md. Gafoor Ansari @ Abdul Ansari 2.

Halim Ansari @ Hakim @ Halim Ansar, Male aged about 36 years, Son of Lukumuddin Ansari @ Nukumuddin Ansari Resident of Village - Nayatola Siktiya and Pegdara Siktiya Mehdipure, P.S.- Kursakanta (Sonamari Godam), District - Araria.

... ... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioners :

Mr.Gopal Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party :

Mr.Jagdhar Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 21-08-2019 At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1, namely, Md. Mokhtar Ansari @ Mukhtar Anasari, has already been arrested and as such his application has become infructuous.

2. As prayed, the anticipatory bail petition as against petitioner no. 1, namely, Md. Mokhtar Ansari @ Mukhtar Anasari, is permitted to be withdrawn and is dismissed as such.

3. As regards petitioner no. 2, namely, Halim Ansari @ Hakim @ Halim Ansar, heard learned counsel on his behalf and learned APP for the State.

4. Petitioner No. 2 apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty of Animal Act, 1960 registered in connection with Kursakanta (Sonamari Godam) P.S. Case No. 137 of 2019.

5. It is submitted that petitioner no. 2 has been falsely implicated on mere suspicion and except the confessional

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51941 of 2019(2) dt.21-08-2019 2/2 statements of the co-accused persons, there is no objective material to connect him with the alleged occurrence. The petitioners claim clean antecedents.

6. Having regard to the nature of accusations and gravity of offence alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner no. 2. His anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed. (Vikash Jain, J) BT/- U T