Patna High CourtCR. MISC./14797/2025bail granted

Md. Taiyab Ansari @ Taiyab Ansari @ Taiyab Ji v. The State Of Bihar

2025-08-04Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14797 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-354 Year-2024 Thana- SHRIKRISHNAPURI District- Patna ====================================================== Md. Taiyab Ansari @ Taiyab Ansari @ Taiyab Ji S/o-- Md. J.U Ansari @ Jamal Uddin Ansari R/o- Q No 58, Type II, P & T Colony, Kidwaipuri, P.O. Kidwaipuri, P. S. Buddha Colony, Patna, Bihar 800001 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Aman Kumar S/o- Ramsundar Rai Village- Gokulpur P.O- Bihta P.S- Bihta Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dayanand Singh, Advocate For the Informant : Mr. S.R.P. Baxi, Sr. Advocate For the State :

Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 04-08-2025 Heard Mr. Dayanand Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S.R.P. Baxi, learned Senior counsel for the Informant and Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Srikrishnapuri P.S. Case No. 354 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 01.12.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. According to prosecution case, the informant entered into an agreement with Hinduja Leyland Finance Ltd. to take 300 old vehicles in Rs. 2,15,00,000/-. The informant paid all the money to the company but only received 193 such vehicles and that too without documents and after few days the

2/5 company started seizing the vehicles and the NOC provided to the informant were false and fabricated. It is further alleged that the manager of the company threatened him when he demanded his money back.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. In fact, the petitioner has joined the Hinduja Leyland Finance Company Ltd. On 09.10.2018 on the post of collection Executive and was posted at Nalanda and he has no connection with any transaction whatsoever which was happening at Branch Office at Patna. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner was employed at the post of collection Executive wherein he was vested with the responsibility to manage collections of the loan advanced by the Company and as such he has no connection with auction of any vehicle and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The petitioner was transferred to Patna vide letter dated 27.05.2024 and he has joined the Patna Branch Office on 03.06.2024 which suggests that the petitioner has absolutely no

3/5 connection with the alleged offence which is said to have been committed from 2022-2023. As per allegation in the F.I.R. the informant has alleged that he has made a transaction of Rs. 2,15,00,000/- ( Rs. Two Crores and Fifteen Lacs) in cash whereas the Company never accepted any transaction in cash beyond permissible limit of Rs. 2,00,000/- ( Rs. Two Lacs) and apart from that informant has not produced a single chit of paper in support of his claim. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that co-accused person, namely, Jai Kishore @ Jai Sharma has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 20.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.

26022 of 2025, another co-accused person, namely, Makrand Kumar Pawan @ Pawan Markandey has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 20.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 28104 of 2025, another coaccused person, namely, Hemant Kumar @ Hemant Kashyap has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 20.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 28166 of 2025 respectively.

5. Mr. S.R.P. Baxi, learned Senior counsel for the Informant as well as learned APP for the State, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of

4/5 the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and he is an employee of Hinduja Leyland Finance Company Ltd. and the Company has cheated the informant between 2020 to June 2022, Company has received a total consideration amount of Rs. 2,15,00,000/- ( Rs. Two Crores and Fifteen Lacs) and the Company has not issued a vehicle documents including No Objection Certificate.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and the petitioner was not present in the Patna Office at the time of occurrence and he was posted at Nalanda as well as similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released 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 S.D.J.M., Patna in connection with Srikrishnapuri P.S. Case No. 354 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions :-

5/5

(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T