Patna High CourtCR. MISC./51077/2019bail rejected

Md. Maroof v. The State Of Bihar

2019-08-17Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51077 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-179 Year-2019 Thana- ARARIA District- Araria ====================================================== MD. MAROOF Son of Rasid Resident of village- Domariya Prasadpur, Police Station- (Mahalgaon) Jokihat, District- Araria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mukesh Kumar Rana For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Renu Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 17-08-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Araria Police Station Case No.179 of 2019 registered under Sections 411, 379, 413 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria. The accusation is that on receiving information about nabbing of the mobile thief by the local people at Chandni Chowk, the informant along with other police personnel reached there. On query, the apprehended accused disclosed his name as Shafique alias Lattu and also disclosed that he had committed the theft of motorcycle along with Md. Sahzad, Md. Faiyaz and Md. Hasnain. Thereafter, the houses of the aforesaid persons

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51077 of 2019(2) dt.17-08-2019 2/2 were searched by the informant and other police personnel and from their house, one motorcycle each, said to be stolen, was recovered. Thereafter, the house of the petitioner was also searched on the disclosure of Md. Faiyaz and one stolen motorcycle was recovered from there.

Having considered the facts and the circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks from today and pray for regular bail, which shall be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T