Mohammuddin Ansari @ Mahamddin Ansari @ Mahmudani Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89700 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2024 Thana- GORIAKOTHI District- Siwan ====================================================== 1.

Mohammuddin Ansari @ Mahamddin Ansari @ Mahmudani Ansari Son of Moharam Ansari vill- Bajitpur, p.s.- Goriakothi, Distt- Siwan 2.

Mohammad Esrafil Ansari @ Israfil Ansari son of Suleman Ansari villBajitpur, p.s.- Goriakothi, Distt- Siwan 3.

Chand Babu Ali @ Chand Babu Ansari @ Chan Babu Ansari Son of Sher Mohamd Miya @ Sher Mahamad Ansari vill- Bajitpur, p.s.- Goriakothi, Distt- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Priya Raj For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajendra Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 27-01-2025

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Goriakothi Police Station Case No. 39 of 2024, dated 12.03.2024, disclosing offences punishable under Sections 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Explosive Substances Act.

3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that on 11.03.2024 at about 11:30 in the night, the informant was awake and saw that the petitioners were standing near the window of her home. In the mean while,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89700 of 2024(2) dt.27-01-2025 2/3 the informant heard the sound of explosion of bomb, she came out and saw that the petitioners were fleeing away and she caught hold the collar of petitioner no. 2, but he succeeded in fleeing away. There is long standing land dispute between them, to which there used to be scuffle between them and today, with the intention to kill, bomb was exploded near the house of the informant.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are having no criminal antecedent and they have been made accused on the basis of land dispute between them. Nobody has sustained injury by explosion of bomb and the daughter of the informant has sustained simple injury on her thumb, caused by hard and blunt substance.

5. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned and have gone through the materials available on record.

6. It appears that the residue/sample of explosives were collected from near the house of the informant and upon examination of the same by the F.S.L., it has been concluded that the residue/sample were part of the country-made bomb. The informant has specifically stated that in the night she saw the petitioners near the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89700 of 2024(2) dt.27-01-2025 3/3 window of her house, who exploded bomb, which has been found to be correct by the F.S.L., I am not inclined to grant the petitioners privilege of anticipatory bail.

7. This application is, accordingly, dismissed (Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √