Ansar @ Md. Ansar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.14852 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -492 Year- 2017 Thana -NARPATGANJ District- ARRARIA ======================================================

1. Ansar @ Md. Ansar, S/o Md. Israr, Resident of Village- Chakorwa, P.S. Narpatganj (Bathanah), District- Araria.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. M.K. Nirala, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in Narpatganj (Bathnaha) P.S. Case No.492 of 2017 instituted for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 307, 427 and 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation made in the First information Report 20-30 unknown persons came armed with lethal weapons. Haidar Ali has extorted pressure to kill the victim. Md. Rijwan took the rifle from the present petitioner and resorted firing that caused damage to his vehicle whereafter they have started assaulting the informant mercilessly. They tried to put fire on the Jeep. They were also taking the Jeep but the same was locked. Allegation has been made that they have taken away

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14852 of 2018 (3) dt.17-04-2018 Rs.4850/- which was kept for petrol. In the unconsciousness position the victim bought to the house and referred to the hospital for his treatment. While he was going to the hospital accused persons intercepted to kill him. Allegation has been made that they have caused injury on different part of the body even they have caused injury on the head. It is dispute of Panchayat Election.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no allegation against the petitioner and others have been granted bail and bail of Md. Rijman has been rejectedd as there is allegation of causing injury.

From the First Information Report, it appears that it is the petitioner who was carrying rifle and from his rifle Rijman resorted firing.

In such view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly the prayer for bail is rejected.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) Vinay/- U T