Syed Haider Imam @ Munna v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17373 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1176 Year-2022 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== 1.
Syed Haider Imam @ Munna S/o- Late Syed Mohammad Mustafa Resident of Naya Tola, Indra Chauk, Bettiah, West Champaran, District-Bettiah, Bihar- 845438.
2.
Md. Aziz Husain @ Pintu S/o- Atia Hussain R/o- Indra Chauk Ganj No-1, Bettiah W.Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Md. Shamshad Alam, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Chandra Sen Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 16-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioners, apprehending their arrest, in connection with Complaint Case No.-1176 of 2022, filed for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 420, 406, 504, 506 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, however, cognizance has been taken only under Section 420 and 406 of the IPC.
3. As per the complaint, both the accused petitioners have taken a scorpio vehicle from the complainant for plying the same and paying Rs. 8,000/- per month to her. However, after payment of Rs. 4,000/-, no further payment is being made by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17373 of 2025(2) dt.16-04-2025 2/3 them to the complainant and even vehicle is not being returned to her.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that no vehicle has been taken by the petitioners from the complainant for plying on road on hire and hence, there is no question of returning the vehicle to the complainant or paying any money to her. He further submits that the case is completely false and baseless.
5. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioners have 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 petition that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents.
7. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the Petitioners for bail.
8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this petition is allowed, directing the petitioners above-named, to be enlarged on bail, in the event of their 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 their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000 /- (Ten
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17373 of 2025(2) dt.16-04-2025 3/3 Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of concerned Court below, in connection with Complaint Case No.-1176 of 2022, 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 petitioners have any criminal antecedents, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners after hearing them and getting satisfied that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents despite their 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 petitioners.
(Jitendra Kumar, J) shoaib/- U T