Samid Ansari @ Md Samid v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9661 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2019 Thana- SUIYA District- Banka ====================================================== Samid Ansari @ Md Samid S/O Karu @ Ishmile Ansari Resident of VillageSuiya, Police Station- Suiya, District- Banka. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Yasmin Bano W/O Samid Ansari R/O Village- Suiya, P.S- Suiya, Distt.- Banka.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Md. Najmul Hodda. Advocate Ms. Shweta, Advocate For the State :

Syed Ehteshamuddin, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 06-03-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, apprehending his arrest, in connection with Suiya P.S. Case No. 16 of 2019, dated 22.02.2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498A, 494, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per allegation, there is demand of additional dowry of Rs. 2,00,000/- and on account of non-fulfillment of the same, she was subjected to cruelty and ultimately she has been living separately for the last five months. It is also alleged that the petitioner-husband has illicit relationship with another lady and even he has entered into second marriage.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9661 of 2025(2) dt.06-03-2025 2/3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that there is no truth in the allegation of demand of dowry and torturing therefor. He further submits that the marriage was solemnized 20 years back and two children are also born out of the wedlock and now marriage is running into rough weather on account of suspicion of the informant/wife that the petitioner is having illicit relationship.

5. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one in the instant case.

6. It has further been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail petition that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents.

7. However, learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the Petitioner for bail.

8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this petition is allowed, directing the petitioner, above-named, to be enlarged on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order, on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000 /- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9661 of 2025(2) dt.06-03-2025 3/3 satisfaction of learned J.M. 1st Class, Banka, in connection with Suiya P.S. Case No. 16 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.PC and on the following conditions:

(i) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that the petitioner has any criminal antecedents, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after hearing him and getting satisfied that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents despite his knowledge of the same.

(ii) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner. (Jitendra Kumar, J) shoaib/- U T