Md. Afzal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79773 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-128 Year-2019 Thana- PIPRA District- East Champaran ====================================================== MD. AFZAL, Aged about 22 years, Male, Son of Md. Khalil, Resident of Village- Kajipura, P.S.- Pipra Kothi, District- East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajive Ranjan Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ramchandra Sahni ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 05-12-2019 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Pipra P.S. Case No.128 of 2019, registered under Sections 413, 414, 356 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant, S.H.O. of Pipra P.S., got information that three persons had come in Bakhri Bazar for selling stolen motorcycle bearing Registration No.BR22E-7971 and mobile of LAVA company. On such, raid was conducted but seeing the police, all the three accused persons started fleeing away. On chase, two persons were apprehended who disclosed their names as Neyaz Ali and Mohammad Abed. The apprehended accused disclosed the name of the petitioner, Md. Afzal who managed to flee away. The stolen motorcycle and the mobile were recovered from the apprehended accused. One of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79773 of 2019(2) dt.05-12-2019 2/2 apprehended accused disclosed that it was the petitioner who had snatched the mobile and had given the same to him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has infact committed no offence. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and this is the first case in which his name surfaced in the so called confession of the apprehended accused but it appears that two persons who were apprehended at the spot while fleeing away disclosed the name of the petitioner as the person who managed to flee away from the place of occurrence and from their possession stolen motorcycle and stolen mobile were recovered.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) S.KUMAR/- U T