Md. Aslam v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88115 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2019 Thana- PARIHAR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Md. Aslam, son of Abdul Quddus @ Mohammad Kuddus, Resident of village- Sutihara, P.S.- Parihar, Dist- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Ms.Madhubala Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Fahimuddin, APP For the Informant : Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 14-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner in the present case is seeking regular bail in connection with Parihar P.S. Case No.167 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 354, 504, 506, 307, 302 and 109/34 of the Indian Penal Code. He is in custody since 16.08.2024. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.
3. Earlier, the prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 18.09.2020 passed in Cr.Misc.No.6129 of 2020. In the alleged occurrence, the father, mother, brother of the informant and the informant himself received multiple injuries. Md. Arman, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88115 of 2024(2) dt.14-02-2025 2/2 brother of the informant who had received two injuries ultimately succumbed to his injuries. It would appear that the informant had taken a specific plea that this petitioner is one of the accused who had been involved in causing injuries to the prosecution side.
4. At this stage, it transpires that despite rejection of the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, he did not surrender and only almost after four years he has been arrested by police on 16.08.2024. In the meantime, the trial of the petitioner has been separated and the trial of the other accused has progressed.
5. Considering that the petitioner has caused delay in progress of the trial, his conduct is such that the same would be a disqualification for him to get privilege of regular bail at this stage. Prayer is refused.
6. This application is dismissed.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) arvind/- U T