Md. Lalu @ Md. Lalo Miya v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61198 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-296 Year-2023 Thana- SINDHIYA District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.

Md. Lalu @ Md. Lalo Miya son of Md. Gajju Miya @ Md. Nasim Resident of village -Khairpura, PS- Singhia, Dist- Samastipur 2.

Md. Naushad @ Md. Naushad son of Md. Gajju Miya @ Md. Nasim Resident of village -Khairpura, PS- Singhia, Dist- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 21-11-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2.

Petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Singhia P.S. Case No.296 of 2023, registered for the offence punishable u/s 363, 366(A)/34 of IPC. 3.

Allegedly, petitioners along with some known and unknown co-accused persons have kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant and when informant went to ask about his daughter, they abused and assaulted him by fists and slaps. 4.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and have not committed any offence. They have been falsely implicated in this case. There is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61198 of 2024(3) dt.21-11-2024 2/2 general and omnibus allegation against all accused persons including the petitioners. Petitioners were living in rented house of the informant and due to petty issues they used to quarrel with each other and merely to oust the petitioners and their family, informant has lodged this case. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent.

5.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that statement of victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C in which she has supported the prosecution case. 6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the the fact that victim has supported the prosecution case in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on their behalf is hereby rejected. 7.

This application is accordingly dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) priyanka/- U T