Allowed

Asaru @ Tajemul v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC5 Nov 2019CR. MISC./66474/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail petition, the High Court granted bail to petitioners apprehending arrest for multiple offences under IPC. The court imposed conditions including furnishing sureties, abstaining from similar offences, cooperating with investigation, and maintaining physical presence during trial.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail furnishing bonds and sureties of Rs. 10,000 each, subject to conditions precedent and future compliance.

Asaru @ Tajemul Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66474 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2019 Thana- THAKURGANJ District- Kishanganj

¶3

======================================================

¶4

ASARU @ TAJEMUL Son of Mahmud Resident of Village - Dhulabari , P.S.- Thakurganj, Distt - Kishanganj.

¶5

Salauddin Son of Late Gyasuddin Resident of Village - Dhulabari , P.S.Thakurganj, Distt - Kishanganj.

¶6

Saktar @ Saktar Alam Son of Md. Kasim @ Md. Anish Resident of Village - Dhulabari , P.S.- Thakurganj, Distt - Kishanganj.

¶7

Shamshad Alam @ Shamshad Son of Md. Anish @ Md. Kasim Resident of Village - Dhulabari , P.S.- Thakurganj, Distt - Kishanganj.

¶8

Imtiyaz Son of Tamizuddin @ Md. Tamizuddin Resident of Village - Fatingagachh, P.S.- Thakurganj, Distt - Kishanganj.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha Mr.Diwakar Sinha For the State : Mr.Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER

¶14

2 05-11-2019

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶16

APP for the State.

¶17

The petitioners apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 341, 323, 324, 337, 338, 353, 295A, 307, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, registered in connection with Thakurganj P.S. Case No. 71 of 2019.

¶18

It is submitted that petitioners have been falsely implicated in an occurrence involving clash between the members of the Muslim community and Adivasis, the latter

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66474 of 2019(2) dt.05-11-2019 2/3

¶20

having forcibly captured tea garden of the former. It is submitted that admittedly four persons received injuries by arrow. It is, therefore, submitted that such injuries are attributed to the assault by the Adivasis and not members of the Muslim community, who were not armed. It is further submitted that the FIR has been instituted against as many a 19 named accused persons, including the petitioners, and 1000 unknown and the basis of the petitioners’ identification is doubtful. Petitioners claim clean antecedents.

¶21

Be that as it may, in the event of petitioners’ arrest or surrender before court below within six weeks from the date of communication of this order, let the above named petitioners be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) each, with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kishanganj in Thakurganj P.S.Case No. 71 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P.C. and also subject to the following further conditions:

¶22

(i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioners.

¶23

(ii) That the petitioners shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66474 of 2019(2) dt.05-11-2019 3/3

¶25

(iii) That the petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make themselves available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶26

(iv) That the petitioners shall remain physically present in Court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned.

¶27

(Vikash Jain, J)

¶28

HR/-

¶29

U T

Asaru @ Tajemul v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asaru @ Tajemul v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Mahato @ Rajeev @ Rajeev Ranjan Vs The State of Bihar

Baidyanath Sah @ Baidhnath Sah @ Baijnath Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Bhola Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Parmeshwar Rajwar Vs The State of Bihar

Alok Tiwari @ Alok Vs The State of Bihar

Chandan Yadav @ Chandan Kumar Yadav @ Chandan Kr. Yadav Vs The State of Bihar