Patna High CourtCR. MISC./65661/2021bail rejected

Hazi Firoz @ Md. Paravej Kaushar v. The State Of Bihar

2022-09-21Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65661 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2020 Thana- JAGDISHPUR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== HAZI FIROZ @ MD. PARAVEJ KAUSHAR S/o Late Irtaza Hussain R/o village- Khiribandh, P.S.- Jagdishpur, District- Bhagalpur, at Present MohallaBrahampura Idgah Line Mojib Road, P.S.- Ishachak, District- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Avinash For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 21-09-2022 The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the office within one month.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Jagdishpur P.S. Case No. 78 of 2020, registered for offence punishable under sections 341, 323, 504, 506, 419, 420, 467 and 468/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation, co-accused Nausad obtained the land through sale deed by cheating and by imposing the petitioner as imposter in place of the informant Ismat Kamal. Actually the land was belonging to the informant and the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65661 of 2021(3) dt.21-09-2022 2/2 present petitioner sold that land to Md. Nausad through sale deed. There is neither signature nor thumb impression of the informant on that sale deed.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated merely because his photograph has been affixed on the sale deed.

There is allegation that the petitioner has sold the land belonging to the informant through sale deed to Md. Nausad. In my view, the petitioner does not deserve the privileges for anticipatory bail. Accordingly it is rejected. Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioner within the stipulated time mentioned hereinabove, failing which, the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

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