Md. Ali @ Md. Ojib Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Adv. Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ratneshwar Prasad, Adv. Mr. Yogendra Kr. Singh, Adv. For the State : Mrs. Indiwar Kumari, APP =====================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶11

7 22-07-2025

¶12

Heard the parties.

¶13

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Paroo

¶14

P.S. Case No. 148 of 2024 registered for the offence under

¶15

Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 302 and 506 of the I.P.C.

¶16

The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 22.09.2024.

¶17

The allegation against the petitioner is to murder the brother of the informant while he was going to Muzaffarpur collecting his documents related with his vehicle.

¶18

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that FIR itself speaks that the

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4164 of 2025(7) dt.22-07-2025 2/3

¶20

information regarding occurrence was given to informant by this petitioner only. It is submitted that even through FIR the suspicion was not raised against this petitioner rather it was raised against other co-accused persons. It was pointed out that subsequently due to enmity petitioner was implicated with present case. It is pointed out by learned counsel that admittedly petitioner is not an eye witness of the occurrence and during course of investigation also none of the prosecution witnesses stated anything incriminating which may suggest prima-facie any involvement of petitioner with crime in question. While concluding the argument, it is submitted that petitioner is found involved in one more criminal case, where he is on bail.

¶21

Learned APP duly assisted by Mr. Ratneshwar Prasad learned counsel appearing for the Informant while opposing the prayer of bail submitted that during investigation petitioner was identified being the owner of scrap shop, but fairly conceded that none identified petitioner by name. It is also conceded that no TIP was conducted in this matter.

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4164 of 2025(7) dt.22-07-2025 3/3

¶23

In view of aforesaid factual submission and by taking note of fact that implications of petitioner prima-facie appears only out of suspicions where petitioner appears to give information regarding occurrence to the informant, coupled with fact that petitioner remains in custody since 22.09.2024, accordingly petitioner above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Paroo P.S. Case No. 148 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned JM 1^st Class (West), Muzaffarpur /concerned court, subject to the conditions as mentioned under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C/ Section 480(3) of BNSS.

¶24

Sudha/- U T

Md. Ali @ Md. Ojib v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Ali @ Md. Ojib 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudhanshu Singh @ Sudhanshu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Vikesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Tehzeeb Ansari Vs The State of Bihar

Raghbendra Jha @ Raghubendra Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Seraj Ali @ Sherbaj Ali Vs The State of Bihar

Ramanand Yadav @ Mojo Yadav Vs The State of Bihar