Patna High Court - Orders
Parwez Alam @ Parvez Alam vs The State Of Bihar on 27 July, 2022
Author: Sudhir Singh
Bench: Sudhir Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4772 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-218 Year-2019 Thana- CHAKAI District- Jamui
======================================================
Parwez Alam @ Parvez Alam (Male), aged about 32 years, Son Of Md Sattar,
Resident Of Village- Garhi, P.S.- Chakai, District- Jamui.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party : Mr. Akbar Ali, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 27-07-2022Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defects, as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Chakai P.S. Case No. 218 of 2019 for the offence registered under Sections 363, 365/34 of the I.P.C. Later on, Sections 302, 201 and 120(B) of the I.P.C. were also added.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 04.12.2019, Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4772 of 2021(4) dt.27-07-2022 2/3 the husband and son of the informant went to Jamui but the husband of the informant did not return. She further alleged that her co-villagers, namely, Parvej Alam (petitioner), Md. Rais, Md. Aslam, Md. Rizwana and Md. Sattar might have kidnapped and killed her husband because there is a case going on between them under POSCO Act and they have also demanded Rs. 7,00,000/- from her husband. Later on, dead bod of her husband was recovered on 06.12.2019.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. Neither there is any eye witness to the alleged occurrence nor there is circumstantial evidence to suggest the participation of the petitioner in the present case. Except for suspicion, there is no substantial evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in the present case.
On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4772 of 2021(4) dt.27-07-2022 3/3 twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-III, Jamui, in connection with Chakai P.S. Case No. 218 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Sudhir Singh, J) U.K./-
U T