Md. Zaid Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8274 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-387 Year-2022 Thana- MAJHAULIA District- West Champaran

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

Md. Zaid Son of Iftekhar Ahmad, Resident of Village - Ward No.- 04, Jawkatia, P.S.- Majhaulia, District - West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶10

ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 02-05-2025

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶13

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Majhaulia P.S. Case No. 387 of 2022, dated 29.05.2022, in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 399, 400, 401, 402, 403, 411, 413, 414, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 472, 379 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 66 and 66(C) of the I.T. Act.

¶14

As per the prosecution case, the police, on confidential information, intercepted a Scorpio vehicle bearing Reg. No. BR-05Q-0077 and also apprehended two persons namely, Prakash Kumar and Brij Kishore, while two other persons succeeded in fleeing away. On search, several passbooks, cheque books, ATM cards of different banks, laptops, mobile phones with

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8274 of 2025(2) dt.02-05-2025 2/3

¶16

SIM cards and Aadhar card were recovered from the said vehicle. It is further alleged that three ATM cards of different banks and one mobile phone were recovered from the pocket of the coaccused Brij Kishore Kumar and accordingly, 46 persons have been made accused in this case.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and there is no cogent material against the petitioner except the confessional statement of the co-accused Tarik Hussain. The similarly situated co-accused persons namely, Amarullah Ansari @ Bhutti has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 27.06.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 25565 of 2024, co-accused Md. Kamran has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 20.03.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 23562 of 2024, co-accused Priyesh Kumar has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 05.03.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 6590 of 2024, co-accused Saddam Ansari @ Saddam Hussain has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 21.03.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 126 of 2023 and co-accused Alok Kumar has also been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 06.02.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 64953 of 2022. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition.

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8274 of 2025(2) dt.02-05-2025 3/3

¶19

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶20

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest / surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran, in connection with Majhaulia P.S. Case No. 387 of 2022 , subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, on further condition:

¶21

(I) The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned trial Court on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bonds of the petitioner are liable to be cancelled.

¶22

The application stands allowed.

¶23

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶24

Shahnawaz/-

¶25

U T

Md. Zaid v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Zaid 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

Rajeen Aslam @ Rajeen Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Bakil Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Deepak Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Chandra Kishore Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Shiv Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Raj Kishore Ray Vs The State of Bihar