Patna High CourtCR. MISC./65381/2021rejected

Sajid Khan @ Shajid Khan v. The State Of Bihar

2022-07-18Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Panwar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65381 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-360 Year-2021 Thana- BIHAR District- Nalanda ====================================================== SAJID KHAN @ SHAJID KHAN S/O LATE MUKHTAR KHAN R/o village- Banabigha, P.S.- Wajirganj, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pankaj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 18-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Biharsharif P.S. Case no. 360/2021 instituted for the offence under Sections 420, 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is a case of snatching the ATM Card by the petitioner while the informant was withdrawing money by using his ATM card. Petitioner after snatching his ATM card, he was trying to withdraw the money in another ATM Center by using the said card.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Appre-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65381 of 2021(2) dt.18-07-2022 2/2 hended co-accused Pankaj Kumar, has disclosed the name of the petitioner as his associate, which has no evidentiary value in the eye of law.

Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that this type of crime is a serious crime for the society now a days. He has further submitted that a petitioner is involved in series of cases.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that there petitioner is a habitual offender and a series of cases are pending against him, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and, as such, his application for bail is rejected.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U