Md. Raish @ Raish Mansuri v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16898 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-123 Year-2014 Thana- CHHATAPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== 1.
Md. Raish @ Raish Mansuri 2.
Md. Samid @ Md. Samid Mansuri Both sons of Md. Ishak Resident Of Village- Jhakhargadh, Ward No 4, PsChhatapur, District- Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar.
2.
Md. Vakil Son of Md. Maksood Resident Of Village- Jhakhargadh, Ward No 4, Ps- Chhatapur, District- Supaul ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Amrit Abhijat, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 25-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Chhatapur P.S. Case No.123 of 2014 registered for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 447, 504, 506 of the IPC.
3. As per prosecution case, on 07.05.2014 at about 08:00 A.M., seven accused persons named in FIR including the petitioners gathered at the agricultural field of the informant and all the accused persons were having the deadly weapon. The informant further alleged that accused Md. Shamid assaulted Jahid on his head by farsa thereby he sustained injury and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16898 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026 2/3 doctor has prescribed the CT Scan and referred the injured to Purnea. The informant further alleged that the accused persons also threatened him. Accordingly, the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and has committed no offence and they have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that there is case and counter case between both the parties and petitioner and informant side are agnates and dispute is going on between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners next submits that no such occurrence has taken place, only general and omnibus allegation has been levelled against the petitioners.
5. The learned APP opposes the anticipatory bail application.
6. It transpires that FIR was registered on 07.05.2014 and charge sheet against accused persons was filed on 16.08.2014. Learned Magistrate took cognizance against the accused persons in the year 2015 and after the lapse of more than 10 years the matter is still pending for the appearance of the accused persons and non-bailable warrant against the accused/petitioners was also issued on 22.11.2022 and again on 15.05.2024. Due to non-appearance of the accused/petitioners
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16898 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026 3/3 the learned lower court is not in a position to pass any order of commitment of this case. As per the fardbeyan, there is specific allegation against the accused/petitioner no.2 to have caused head injury to Jahid by farsa, which has resulted in grave injury.
7. Taking notice of the conduct of the accused/petitioners, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
6. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) Prakash Narayan U T