Ainul Khan @ Ainul Miyan @ Gobindjee Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ainul Khan @ Ainul Miyan @ Gobindjee Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release on bail after framing of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court, subject to conditions: (I) one bailor an own/close family member; (II) appearance on each and every trial date, with Trial Court liberty to cancel bonds on default on two consecutive dates; (III) prosecution free to move for cancellation if petitioner tampers with evidence or witnesses.

Issue for consideration

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in connection with Amba P.S. Case No. 12 of 2008, instituted under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act and Section 17 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, given his custody since 03.05.2024 and three criminal antecedents.

Ratio / Principle

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court was inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

Key takeaways

Petitioner to be released on bail after framing of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Amba P.S. Case No. 12 of 2008.ratio¶20
Condition (I): one of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner.ratio¶23
Condition (II): petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial; on default in appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BAIL GRANTED - Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No. 5029 of 2025 (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J.; order dt. 28-04-2025). Petitioner Ainul Khan @ Ainul Miyan @ Gobindjee sought bail in Amba P.S. Case No. 12 of 2008 (Thana AMBA, District Aurangabad), instituted under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act and Section 17 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act; prosecution case that police, on information that some naxalite members were going to commit crime, intercepted a vehicle and recovered weapons and uniforms of the Indian Army, the naxalite members having fled. Counsel argued a general and omnibus allegation, no specific overt act, no incriminating article recovered from the petitioner's conscious possession, custody since 03.05.2024, three criminal antecedents, and that co-accused persons had already been granted bail by the court below; the APP opposed, citing three antecedents of similar nature. Considering the facts, circumstances and period of custody, the Court directed release after framing of charge (if not already framed) on a Rs.10,000/- bail bond with two like sureties, subject to: one own/close-family bailor; appearance on each and every trial date with Trial Court liberty to cancel bonds on default on two consecutive dates; and prosecution liberty to seek cancellation upon tampering with evidence or witnesses.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5029 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2008 Thana- AMBA District- Aurangabad

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

Ainul Khan @ Ainul Miyan @ Gobindjee S/O Late Basiruddin khan R/O vill.- Gamhariya Tola Suryapura, P.O and P.s-Tandwa, Dist.- Aurnagabad (Bihar)

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pronoti Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

ORAL ORDER

3 28-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Amba P.S. Case No. 12 of 2008 instituted for the offences under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act and Section 17 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act.

Prosecution case, in short, is that, police, on the basis of information that some members of naxalite were going to commit crime, intercepted a vehicle and recovered weapons and uniforms of Indian Army from the said vehicle whereas the members of naxalite managed to flee away.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5029 of 2025(3) dt.28-04-2025 2/3

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that general and omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner. No specific overt act is alleged against the petitioner. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 03.05.2024 and has three criminal antecedents. Learned counsel further submitted that other co-accused persons have already been granted bail by the learned court below.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned APP further submitted that petitioner has three criminal antecedents of similar nature and, therefore, he may not be released on bail.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

Let the petitioner be released on bail, after framing of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Amba P.S. Case No. 12 of 2008, subject to the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5029 of 2025(3) dt.28-04-2025 3/3

following conditions:

(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner.

(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

(III) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

Alok Verma/-

U T