Md. Abbas v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84776 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-161 Year-2019 Thana- SALAKHUA District- Saharsa ====================================================== Md. Abbas, Male, aged about 66 years, Son of Md. Najif, Resident of Village - Gorgama, P.S.- Salkhua, District - Saharsa. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Amarnath Jha, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 17-03-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Salkhua PS Case No. 161 of 2019 dated 04.07.2019 instituted under Sections 341, 447, 448, 323, 324, 307, 354B, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is of stabbing by knife in the abdomen of the brother of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there are different versions coming from different witnesses and, thus, the prosecution story cannot be believed. It was further submitted that the allegation of inflicting knife blow in the abdomen is against two persons in the FIR whereas the injured

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84776 of 2019 dt.17-03-2020 2/2 himself has taken the name only of the petitioner. It was further submitted that as per the version of the injured person, dagger blow was inflicted on the head, sword blow on the hand and then knife blow on the abdomen but only one stab wound has been found on the abdomen. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has no other criminal antecedent and is in custody since 18.10.2019.

5. Learned APP, from the case diary as well as learned counsel for the informant submitted that all witnesses have been consistent in their version that it was the petitioner who inflicted knife blow on the abdomen causing grievous injury. It was further submitted that as far as the petitioner is concerned, there is no discrepancy in the version of the witnesses, including the informant of having inflicted grievous injury on the abdomen.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U T