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

2

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.

S.KUMAR/-

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)

U

T