Meer Hassan Ansari And ANR v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.29129 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -90 Year- 2017 Thana -RAMNAGAR DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ======================================================
1. Meer Hassan Ansari Son of late Deen Mohammad Ansari
2. Allauddin Ansari Son of Meer Hassan Ansari Both resident of VillageDanmarwa, P.S. Ram Nagar, District West Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Upadhyay Saurabh Kumar, Adv.
For the informant : Mr. Ravi Shankar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pancha Nand Pandit, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 07-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. Petitioners seek bail in connection with Ram Nagar P.S. Case No. 90 of 2017 for offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 307, 504/34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
The prosecution case, as lodged by the informant, is that the petitioner no. 1 along with his son petitioner no. 2 had cut the branches of mango tree of the informant and when he went to enquire about it, the petitioners along with accomplice Upendra Pandey started incriminating firing on which his son was injured
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29129 of 2017 (3) dt.07-09-2017 2/3 along with other six school going children who sustained firearm injuries.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that the injuries have been found to be simple in nature, the petitioners are languishing in judicial custody since 12.03.2017 and remanded in the present case on 04.04.2017 and that charge-sheet has already been submitted and there is no allegation of tampering of the prosecution witnesses by the petitioners.
However, learned counsel for the informant and State vehemently oppose the prayer for bail stating therein that the petitioners do not have a clean antecedent and as many as three cases are pending against them some under the Arms Act and large number of firearms have been recovered during course of search of the house of the petitioners. The petitioners resorted to incriminate firing in densely populated area and as many as six school going children also have been injured by firearms, hence, oppose the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances and the materials on record, I am not inclined to grant privilege of bail to
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29129 of 2017 (3) dt.07-09-2017 3/3 the petitioners at this stage in connection with Ram Nagar P.S. Case No. 90 of 2017 pending in the court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bagaha, West Champaran. However, the petitioners may renew their prayer for bail after framing of the charge.
The application is, accordingly, rejected.
(Nilu Agrawal, J) Devendra/- U T