Patna High CourtCR. MISC./61999/2022rejected

Abdul Majid @ Majid v. The State Of Bihar

2023-04-12Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61999 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-265 Year-2022 Thana- BAISI District- Purnia ====================================================== 1.

ABDUL MAJID @ MAJID Son of Nazir @ Imam Nazir Resident of Village - Loutiyabari, P.S. - Baisi, District - Purnea. 2.

Gulam Rabbani @ Nawab Son of Nazir @ Imam Nazir Hussain Resident of Village - Loutiyabari, P.S. - Baisi, District - Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Adv. With Mr. Mazher Alam and Mr. Kumar Rajdeep, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal Md. Manzer Karim ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 12-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Baisi P.S. Case No. 265 of 2022 registered for the offence under sections 302, 120B, 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged in the first information report and they have been falsely implicated in this case due to previous enmity. Nothing specific is alleged against these petitioners. There is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61999 of 2022(2) dt.12-04-2023 2/2 Learned Adll. P.P. appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is allegation of assault against these petitioners also which is supported by the injuries sustained. The petitioner, therefore, does not deserve to be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering the nature of allegations levelled and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. His prayer for bail is, accordingly, rejected.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) mcv/- U T