Patna High CourtCR. MISC./62966/2023dismissed

Md. Yunus Md. Yunus Miyan v. The State Of Bihar

2023-10-17Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62966 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2023 Thana- HARLAKHI District- Madhubani ====================================================== MD. YUNUS MD. YUNUS MIYAN SON OF LATE LD AINUL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE ITAHARWA, PS- HARLAKHI, DISTMADHUBANI. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bhavesh Kumar Sah, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 17-10-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Harlakhi P.S. Case No. 15 of 2023, registered for the offence punishable 341, 323, 353, 332 and 333/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per FIR, the informant apprehended two accused persons near the check post and the petitioner along with 15-20 co-accused persons on 8-10 motor-cycles came and blocked the vehicle of the informant while he was going to Excise Police Station, Madhubani with apprehended persons and assaulted him, which caused hindrance in discharging the official duty to him.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62966 of 2023(2) dt.17-10-2023 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that coaccused, namely, Md. Manowar @ Md. Munawar @ Md. Manauwar has been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 35573, in which the coordinate Bench has stated that there is no specific overt act against the petitioners, but from perusal of the FIR it appears that there is specific allegation against the petitioners.

5. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail, which is accordingly dismissed.

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