Patna High Court - Orders
Anul Khan @ Anul Miyan @ Ainul Khan vs The State Of Bihar on 9 August, 2023
Author: Sunil Kumar Panwar
Bench: Sunil Kumar Panwar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30276 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2014 Thana- KUTUMBA District- Aurangabad
======================================================
ANUL KHAN @ ANUL MIYAN @ AINUL KHAN Son of Late Bashruddin
Khan Resident of village-Suryapura, P.S.-Tandwa, District-Aurangabad
(Bihar)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shailesh Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR
ORAL ORDER
3 09-08-2023Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections, 147, 148, 149, 452, 427, 436, 380, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 17 of the CLA Act, CLA Act, ¾ Explosive Substance Act and Section 16, 38, 40 of U.A.P. Act.
As per allegation in the FIR, 10-15 unknown moists knocked the door of the informant introducing himself as member of police picket kala pahad. When the informant opened the door, 5-7 moists entered into the house forcibly and inquired about his son, who was working on Cobra Battalion. Miscreants drove informant's family members from the house Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30276 of 2023(3) dt.09-08-2023 2/2 and put the house on fire and exploded it by bombs. They looted ornaments and other valuable items from the house.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case duet o his long criminal antecedents. Neither the petitioner is named in the FIR not put on TIP. There is no eye witness of the alleged occurrence. Nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 22.02.2022.
The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge III, Aurangabad (Bihar) in connection with Kutumba P.S. Case No. 63 of 2014.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/-
U