Patna High CourtCR. MISC./68268/2023dismissed

Md. Sarfaraj @ Patar v. The State Of Bihar

2023-10-18Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68268 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2021 Thana- BELSAND District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== 1.

MD. SARFARAJ @ PATAR SON OF MD. USMAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- JAFARPUR, PS- BELSAND, DISTT- SITAMARHI 2.

MD. IMRAN ALAM @ MD. IBRAN SON OF MD. USMAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- JAFARPUR, PS- BELSAND, DISTT- SITAMARHI ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate Mr.Madhubala Verma For the Informant :

Mr. Diinesh Jha Mr. Hanslal For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Satya Nand Shukla ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-10-2023 Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners Mr.Satya Nand Shukla and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners are in custody since 04.08.2023 in connection with Belsand P.S. Case No. 02/2021 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341/323/302/201/ 120(B)/504/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the son of the informant was brutally killed by the petitioners and others.

4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that there is no eye-witness to the occurrence.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68268 of 2023(2) dt.18-10-2023 2/2 He further submits that petitioners are not named in the F.I.R. The petitioners have no criminal antecedents.

5. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that the petitioners are absconders and the process under Sections 82 and 83 of the Cr. P.C. were executed against them. Thereafter, they have surrendered.

6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the allegations levelled against these petitioners, this application for grant of bail is dismissed for the present.

8. The petitioners may renew their prayer for grant of bail after framing of charge.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Saif/- U T