Ibrahim Ansari @ Md. Ibrahim Ansari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6191 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-246 Year-2025 Thana- Kalibagh District- West Champaran ====================================================== IBRAHIM ANSARI @ MD. IBRAHIM ANSARI Son of Late Suleman Ansari Resident of Village - Chawani, Chapatiya Road, Ward No.- 27, Police Station - Manuapul, District - West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State .
2. The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in a case instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 308(5), 316(2), 318(3), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 62 of B.N.S.
3 The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant, Pankaj Kumar Motani, filed Complaint Case No.1183C of 2025 alleging that from 21.07.2022 onwards, Kiran Devi, Ajay Kumar @ Kaju Sah along with co-accused persons including this petitioner induced him to purchase one katha of land belonging to Brahmdeo Yadav. Since he could not afford the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6191 of 2026(3) dt.04-02-2026 2/3 entire land, Kiran Devi introduced Ajay Kumar @ Kaju Sah to purchase half of it jointly. Relying on their representations, the informant paid a total amount of 25,50,000/- at different times. ₹ Later, on verification, he came to know that he had been deceived, as the land shown was neither valuable nor as assured. It is further alleged that the other this petitioner along with other accused persons supported Kiran Devi and Ajay Kumar @ Kaju Sah in committing the fraud.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence . Petitioner is simply witness to the agreement to sale . The land in question does not belong to the petitioner, nor did he ever negotiate with the informant in this regard, which is evident from the FIR. It is further submitted that the petitioner has neither received any amount from the informant nor derived any benefit, and the dispute, at best, is of civil nature . Petitioner claims clean antecedent. 5 . Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above , this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6191 of 2026(3) dt.04-02-2026 3/3 is directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of this order and in the event of his arrest or surrender in connection with Kalibagh P.S. Case no. 246 of 2025, they will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate , Bettiah, West Champaran subject to the conditions as laid down under section 482 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Koushik/- U T