Muzaffar And ANR v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.36217 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -52 Year- 2017 Thana -JOKIHAT District- ARRARIA ======================================================
1. Muzaffar, Son of Late Taslim,
2. Naushad, Son of Late Taslim, Both are resident of Village- Nonakar, P.S.- Jokihat, Dist- Araria. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Veena Rani Prasad., A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 18-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Jokihat P.S. Case No. 52 of 2017 instituted for the offence under Sections 447, 341, 323, 386, 379, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it is a matter of land dispute. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners. They have forcibly taken possession of the land of the informant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is allowed. In the event of surrender/arrest of the petitioners, named above, within six weeks from today, in connection with Jokihat P.S. Case No.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36217 of 2018 (3) dt.18-07-2018 2/2 52 of 2017, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr. P.C. with further conditions
(1) bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned, (2) petitioners shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and their absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be liable to cancel their bail bond and (3) if petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioners. (Sanjay Priya, J) S.Ali/- U T