Allowed

Saheb @ Badal @ Akhatar Ansari v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC25 Feb 2023CR. MISC./66314/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order granting regular bail to the petitioner in a case involving offences under IPC, Arms Act, and UAPA. The court noted the petitioner was not apprehended at the scene, no incriminating material was recovered from him, and co-accused with similar allegations had already been granted bail, resulting in release on Rs. 10,000 bonds.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to specific conditions.

Saheb @ Badal @ Akhatar Ansari Vs The State of Bihar — Corruption | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66314 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-163 Year-2020 Thana- SONO District- Jamui

¶3

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

¶4

Saheb @ Badal @ Akhatar Ansari S/O Sahadat Ansari Resident of villageLuppi, P.S.- Bengabad, District- Giridih (Jharkhand).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amresh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 25-02-2023

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to

¶13

remove the defect(s), if any, as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks from today.

¶14

Heard Mr. Amresh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶15

The petitioner seeks regular bail, who is in custody in connection with Sono (Charka Pathar) P.S. Case No. 163 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147/148/149/120(B)/121(A) of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 25(1-B)(a)/26 of the Arms Act and Sections 16/17/18/19/20/21/22 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

¶16

It is alleged that the police on a tip off regarding the

¶17

assemblage of naxalites raided the place of

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66314 of 2022(2) dt.25-02-2023 2/4

¶19

occurrence, however, noticing the police party all the naxalites, including the petitioner, succeeded in fleeing away by raising slogans against the police personnels. On search, various arms and ammunition have been recovered.

¶20

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that from the FIR it is evident that the petitioner was neither apprehended at the spot nor any incriminating material has been recovered from his person or possession. He further submits that in fact only on account of the past criminal antecedents as the petitioner is found involve in three other criminal cases his name has been implicated in this case without there being any material. He next submits that other co-accused person having identical allegation has been allowed the privilege of bail by the learned co-ordinate bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 53259 of 2021 vide order dated 27.04.2022. So far the petitioner is concerned, he is in custody for over a period of 11 months and now the investigation of the crime is complete and the chage-sheet has been submitted.

¶21

On the other hand learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that the petitioner appears to be an active member of the naxal group as his involvement is found in other three criminal cases of

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66314 of 2022(2) dt.25-02-2023 3/4

¶23

identical nature.

¶24

Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that the petitioner was neither apprehended at the spot nor any incriminating material has been recovered from his possession, coupled with the period of custody and the fact that the other co-accused having identical allegation has been allowed the privilege of bail, let the petitioner, named above, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamui, in connection with Sono (Charka Pathar) P.S. Case No. 163 of 2020, subject to the condition that one of the bailors will be the close relative of the petitioner with further conditions which are as follows:-

¶25

(i) The petitioner will cooperate in conclusion of the

¶26

trial.

¶27

(ii) He will remain present on each and every date of trial till disposal of the case.

¶28

(iii) He will not try to tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witnesses to delay the disposal of trial.

¶29

(iv) In the event of default of two consecutive dates without any cogent reason, his bail bonds will liable to be

¶30

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66314 of 2022(2) dt.25-02-2023 4/4

¶31

cancelled.

¶32

(v) The court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take immediate step for cancelling the bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds, in terms of the above-mentioned order, shall not be delayed for this purpose or in the name of verification.

¶33

(Harish Kumar, J)

¶34

Anjani/-

¶35

U T

Saheb @ Badal @ Akhatar Ansari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saheb @ Badal @ Akhatar Ansari 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

Suraj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Bablu Paswan Vs the State of Bihar

Dheeraj Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Bipin Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Manish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Garibnath Sahni @ Munna Sahni Vs The State of Bihar