Md. Naseer @ Md. Nasir v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18501 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-314 Year-2025 Thana- BENIPATTI District- Madhubani ====================================================== 1.

Md. Naseer @ Md. Nasir Son of Md. Mangal R/o - Gamhariya, P.S - Benipatti, District - Madhubani 2.

Md. Arman Son of Md. Naseer @ Md. Nasir R/o - Gamhariya, P.S - Benipatti, District - Madhubani 3.

Tanjila Khatoon Wife of Md. Naseer @ Md. Nasir R/o - Gamhariya, P.S - Benipatti, District - Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Md. Tahir son of Md. Idris R/o - Gamhariya, P.S - Benipatti, District - Madhubani ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Alias Ashok Karn, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in Benipatti P. S. Case No. 314 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 96, 115(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3. As per F.I.R., co-accused Md. Farman along with one unknown accused person kidnapped minor daughter of the informant and when informant went to the house of co-accused Md. Farman to make complaint, these petitioners abused and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18501 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026 2/2 ousted him.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. Specific accusation of kidnapping is against co-accused Md. Farman and petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case merely because they are family members of co-accused Md. Farman. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that during investigation, victim was recovered and in her statement, recorded under Section 183 BNSS, she has stated that these petitioners were also involved in the kidnapping and threatened her not to disclose the incident to anyone.

6. Considering the nature of accusation and statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is refused. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T