Mumtaj Kuraishi @ Mumtaz Quraishi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73182 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-144 Year-2019 Thana- CHENARI District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.

MUMTAJ KURAISHI @ MUMTAZ QURAISHI Son of Late Mansur Quraishi Resident of Village - Khurmabad, P.S.- Chenari, District- Rohtas 2.

Aslam Quraishi Son of Sahabu Quraishi Resident of Village - Khurmabad, P.S.- Chenari, District- Rohtas 3.

Aazam Quraishi Son of Khalil Quraishi Resident of Village - Khurmabad, P.S.- Chenari, District- Rohtas 4.

Sofiyan Quraishi Son of Late Mansur Quraishi Resident of Village - Khurmabad, P.S.- Chenari, District- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Siddharth Harsh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anish Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 23-03-2021 Heard both sides.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Chenari P.S. case No. 144/2019 registered under Section 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 342, 307, 427, 504, 153A of the IPC.

The informant alleged that he is driver of tractor of one Bhagwan Singh and he loaded sand on tractor and was going to the tube well of Bhagwan Singh. When he reached near Upgraded Urdu Madhya Vidyalaya the petitioners and others stopped the informant and indiscriminately assaulted him. The informant sustained injuries in his eyes and other parts of his body. Blood started oozing out from his right ear. The accused persons also damaged the tractor. The informant further alleged that Shamsher Quraishi assaulted him with butt of pistol. Mumtaz Quraishi assaulted him with butt of rifle. Chunnu

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73182 of 2019(4) dt.23-03-2021 2/2 Quraishi and others also assaulted him.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and they have committed no offence. On account of previous enmity the informant lodged the case. The informant met with an accident and got injuries but taking advantage of this fact the informant in order to take revenge lodged this case but from perusal of the case diary and injury report it appears that the informant made allegation that all the accused persons surrounded him and began to assault. From the injury report, it appears that the informant got injuries on different parts of his body. The injuries on the face of it do not appear to have been caused on account of accident. Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T