Md. Taiyab Ali And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.2738 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -122 Year- 2017 Thana -PUSA District- SAMASTIPUR ======================================================

1. Md. Taiyab Ali, Son of Md. Hanif,

2. Awwda Pravin @ Abeda Praveen, Wife of Md. Taiyab Ali,

3. Md. Tarik Ajeej @ Md. Tarique Aziz, S/o Md. Taiyab Ali, All are resident of Village- Bogra, P.S.- Jamuria, District- Burdwan, West Bengal.

.... .... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jay Prakash Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Ansarul Haque ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 2.

12-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in relation to Pusa P.S. Case No. 122 of 2017 registered under Sections 323, 307, 332, 363, 364, 379 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate - VI, Samastipur.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the entire allegations against these petitioners are false, concocted and baseless and this is a case of false

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2738 of 2018 (2) dt.12-02-2018 implication, whereas learned counsel representing the informant submits that in fact there are specific allegations in the F.I.R. and these three petitioners have forcibly taken away the victim lady. Learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Samastipur while refusing to grant anticipatory bail has taken note of the various paragraphs of the case diary from which it was found that the witnesses have supported the occurrence. The victim is still traceless and I.O. is in search of victim girl.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances that there are specific allegations against these petitioners and the victim lady is still traceless, I am not inclined to grant Anticipatory Bail to these petitioners.

Accordingly, prayer for Anticipatory Bail of these petitioners is rejected.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.) Rajeev/- U T