Md. Sakir @ Mohammad Sakir Ansari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60735 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-158 Year-2024 Thana- BHAGWANPUR District- Begusarai ====================================================== Md. Sakir @ Mohammad Sakir Ansari Son of Md. Sadik R/O VillageDamodarpur, P.S.- Bhagwanpur, District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Mahendra Thakur, Adv.
Mr. Krishna Prabhat, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 29-08-2025
1. Heard the parties.
2. This is second anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No. 158 of 2024 dt: 06.06.2024 registered for the offence under Section 341, 323, 354, 307, 379, 504 / 34 of the I.P.C. inasmuch earlier anticipatory bail application bearing Cr. Misc. No. 12923 of 2025 filed by the petitioner has been rejected on merit on 08.04.2025.
3. As per the prosecution case on 05.06.2024 in the evening at about 5:00 P.M. the petitioner along with other accused persons arrived, assaulted and abused the informant and his son namely Rashid. It has further been alleged that the petitioner assaulted the son of the informant on his head by iron rod due to which he sustained head injury.
4. Mr. Mahendra Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60735 of 2025(2) dt.29-08-2025 2/2 submits that certain arguments could not be placed at the time of hearing of the first anticipatory bail application therefore second anticipatory bail application has been filed by the petitioner. He further submits that the occurrence has taken place in the evening but the injury report was prepared prior to the occurrence in the morning itself. He further submits that though the injury has been opined as grievous in nature but there is no visible injury found on the body of the victim. He next submits that good sense prevailed between the parties and they have arrived at mutual compromise (Annexure - P/4).
5. Having considered the submissions advanced by the petitioner and the State, taking into account the fact that petitioner tried to argue the matter afresh on certain grounds and this Court at the time of hearing of the first anticipatory bail application took all the relevant factors into consideration and thereafter rejected the prayer for bail on merit, as such, I am not inclined to entertain the second anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner on certain grounds placed for the second time. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
praful/- (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) U T