Partly allowed

Mojib Ansari @ Mujib Ansari v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC16 Mar 2026CR. MISC./89447/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants anticipatory bail to three petitioners accused of assault and looting but rejects the application of a fourth petitioner due to specific allegations causing grievous injury. Bail for the allowed applicants is secured with a bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed for Petitioners Nos. 1, 2 and 4 on bail of Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties; application of Petitioner No. 3 rejected.

Mojib Ansari @ Mujib Ansari Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89447 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-120 Year-2025 Thana- DHANAHA District- West Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Mojib Ansari @ Mujib Ansari S/o Late Rogi Ansari @ Late Rogi Miya R/o Village - Ranglalahi Jolahapatti, P.S - Dhanaha, District - West Champaran

¶5

Meraj Ansari @ Meraj S/o Mojib Ansari R/o Village - Ranglalahi Jolahapatti, P.S - Dhanaha, District - West Champaran

¶6

Fakaruddin Ansari @ Fakaruddin S/o Mojib Ansari R/o Village - Ranglalahi Jolahapatti, P.S - Dhanaha, District - West Champaran

¶7

Dinesh Yadav S/o Banhu Yadav @ Bandhu Yadav R/o Village - Ranglalahi Jolahapatti, P.S - Dhanaha, District - West Champaran

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioners : Mr. Ramendra Kumar Bharti, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 16-03-2026

¶13

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

¶14

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 308(3), 303(2), 76, 324(4) and 329(4) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶15

As per prosecution case, it is alleged that on 20.04.2025, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this petitioner and 20 unknown persons, abused and assaulted informant and others and also looted household articles. It is

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89447 of 2025(3) dt.16-03-2026 2/3

¶17

alleged that Petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and 4 fired three rounds from country made pistol and fled away and Petitioner No. 3 assaulted son of informant, namely Nitish Kumar with spear causing injury near his eye.

¶18

It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and have committed no offence. Both parties are co-villagers and due to long standing land dispute, this false and concocted case has been lodged. Though Petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and 4 are alleged to have fired three rounds but no one has sustained any fire arm injuries. Rest of the allegations are ornamental in order to make the case grave.

¶19

On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners and submitted that petitioners are named in the F.I.R. with specific accusation that they, along with other accused persons, abused and assaulted informant and others. Petitioner No. 3 assaulted son of informant, namely Nitish Kumar, due to which he sustained injury near his eyes and doctor has opined the nature of injury as grievous.

¶20

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, specific and direct nature of accusation and nature of

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89447 of 2025(3) dt.16-03-2026 3/3

¶22

injuries allegedly caused by Petitioner No. 3, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to Petitioner No. 3 is rejected.

¶23

So far as Petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and 4 are concerned, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and general and omnibus nature of accusation, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to Petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and 4 is allowed.

¶24

Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named Petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and 4 be enlarged on bail on furnishing bailbond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Bagaha, West Champaran in connection with Dhanaha P.S. Case No. 120 of 2025, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S..

¶25

With the aforesaid directions, this application stands disposed of.

¶26

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

¶27

shashank/-

¶28

U T

Mojib Ansari @ Mujib Ansari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mojib Ansari @ Mujib 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

Bharat Kumar Sah @ Bharat Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Shubham Kumar Thakur @ Subham Kumar Vs The state of Bihar

Jamshed Ali Vs The State of Bihar

Yashodhara Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Akshay Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Narendra Kumar Yadav @ Narendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar