Dismissed¶22

Dablu Miya @ Sahid Alam v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC20 Sept 2024CR. MISC./2024/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail rejected | Patna HC Cr. Misc. No. 2024 of 2024 | order dated 20-09-2024 | Anil Kumar Sinha J | Sangrampur PS Case No. 372 of 2023, East Champaran | S.188 IPC; Ss.25(9), 27 Arms Act | celebratory firing during orchestra programme; corroborated video clip and supportive witnesses; petitioner stated to have three criminal antecedents; parity with co-accused (Cr. Misc. No. 113 of 2024, dismissed 24.01.2024) | regular bail after surrender to be considered by District Court uninfluenced by this rejection.

What did the court decide?

None; anticipatory bail refused. Court directed that if the petitioner surrenders before the learned District Court and seeks regular bail, it will be considered on its own merits without prejudice to this dismissal. ¶22

Dablu Miya @ Sahid Alam Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner for the offences disclosed in Sangrampur PS Case No. 372 of 2023 under Section 188 IPC and Sections 25(9), 27 of the Arms Act (alleged celebratory firing during an orchestra programme).

¶11

Court's answer

Witnesses have supported the prosecution case that the petitioner was indulged in celebratory firing in the orchestra programme before a large assembly, and the video clip showing the petitioner's indulgence in celebratory firing is supported by other witnesses; prima facie materials are therefore available on record against the petitioner.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

Celebratory firing is dangerous and illegal, is now-a-days rampant in many places at many occasions, and poses a serious risk to public safety.

¶18

Key takeaways

As the anticipatory bail application of the similarly situated co-accused had already been dismissed by this Court (vide order dated 24.01.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 113 of 2024), the court was not inclined to grant the petitioner the privilege of anticipatory bail.ratio¶20
If the petitioner surrenders before the learned District Court and seeks regular bail, the learned District Court will consider the same on its own and without being prejudiced by the dismissal of the petitioner's anticipatory bail application by this Court.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2024 of 2024 (oral order of Honourable Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha dated 20-09-2024): Anticipatory bail application of Dablu Miya @ Sahid Alam, arising out of Sangrampur PS Case No. 372 of 2023 (District East Champaran) disclosing offences under Section 188 IPC and Sections 25(9), 27 Arms Act for alleged celebratory firing during an orchestra programme — REJECTED. Witnesses were found to have supported the prosecution case and the video clip of the petitioner's celebratory firing was corroborated by other witnesses; celebratory firing was noted as dangerous and illegal, now-a-days rampant, and a serious risk to public safety; prima facie materials held available against the petitioner, who was stated to have three criminal antecedents and claimed he was not present at the place of occurrence, his name having transpired through villagers' disclosure. Parity noted: the similarly situated co-accused's anticipatory bail application had already been dismissed (Cr. Misc. No. 113 of 2024, order dated 24.01.2024). Direction: upon surrender, the District Court to consider a regular-bail application on its own merits, without prejudice to this dismissal.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2024 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-372 Year-2023 Thana- SANGRAMPUR District- East Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Dablu Miya @ Sahid Alam Son of Wajir Alam @ Wajir Miya Resident of Village- Majurahan, P.S.- Turkauliya, District- East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Ranjana Srivastava, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dashrath Mehta, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶10

6 20-09-2024 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶11

This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Sangrampur PS case no. 372 of 2023, disclosing offences punishable under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(9), 27 of Arms Act.

¶12

The prosecution story, as per the First Information Report, is that the petitioner along with other co-accused persons, were indulged in celebratory firing during an orchestra programme.

¶13

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged, inasmuch he was not present at the place of occurrence and his

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2024 of 2024(6) dt.20-09-2024 2/3

¶15

name transpired in this case on the basis of disclosure made by the villagers. The petitioner is stated to be having three criminal antecedents.

¶16

On the other hand, learned APP for the State, referring to the First Information Report, submits that the police received a viral video of the celebration, in which some of the persons were resorting to celebratory firing and the local persons identified the petitioner and one another co-accused namely Chunnu Miya.

¶17

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the materials available on record.

¶18

From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that learned District Court, while rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner, has taken note of the fact that the witnesses have supported the prosecution case that the petitioner was indulged in celebratory firing in the orchestra programme, where a large number of persons had assembled. The celebratory firing is dangerous and illegal and now-a-days, it is rampant in many places at many occasions. It poses a serious risk to public safety. The video clip showing petitioner’s indulgence in celebratory firing is supported by other witnesses also. Therefore, it appears that prima facie materials are

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2024 of 2024(6) dt.20-09-2024 3/3

¶20

available on record against the petitioner. The anticipatory bail application of similarly situated co-accused has been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 24.01.2024, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 113 of 2024.

¶21

Accordingly, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶22

This application is, accordingly, rejected.

¶23

However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned District Court and seeks regular bail, the learned District Court will consider the same on its own and without being prejudiced that anticipatory bail application of the petitioner has been dismissed by this Court.

¶24

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)

¶25

rinkee/-

¶26

U T

Dablu Miya @ Sahid Alam v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dablu Miya @ Sahid Alam v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Jayshree and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Bharat Jha Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Arun Kumar Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Mukesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rajesh Sahani Vs The State of Bihar

Santosh kumar Vs The State of Bihar