Jahid Ansari @ Jahil Ali @ Jahid Ali v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22558 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-474 Year-2015 Thana- BODHGAYA District- Gaya ====================================================== Jahid Ansari @ Jahil Ali @ Jahid Ali S/o Islam Miyan R/o Vill-Jaipur, P.S.- Sherghati, Distt- Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arvind Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 01-05-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State.

2. The accused/petitioner is not named in F.I.R. and apprehending his arrest in connection with Bodhgaya (Cherki) P.S. Case No. 474 of 2015, registered for the offences punishable under Section 17 of C.L.A. Act.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is to ask for extortion of 5% of total work value from the informant, who is a contractor engaging in construction of road between Bodhgaya and Gaya.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was not named in FIR and his name transpired during the course of investigation on the basis of confessional statement of apprehended co-accused namely,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22558 of 2025(2) dt.01-05-2025 2/2 Baijnath Manjhi @ Pratap Ji and Vinod Mehta @ Marandi Ji @ Sudhir Verma. It is submitted that till now, in furtherance of their statements, no incriminating materials recovered qua this petitioner.

5. Learned APP while opposing the prayer of bail submitted that investigation in this case is in initial stage, where the apprehended co-accused specifically named this person qua his involvement in occurrence. It is submitted that petitioner found involved in six cases of similar nature.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and by taking note of fact as investigation of this case is in initial stage, where the petitioner appears prima facie actively involved in occurrence, coupled with the fact that the found involved in six similar nature of cases, accordingly prayer of anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands rejected herewith.

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) veena/- U T