Kamaruddin Ansari @ Dholakiya v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28726 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-129 Year-2014 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Kamaruddin Ansari @ Dholakiya S/o- Late Amaruddin Ansari @ Amiruddin Ansari R/v- Sariswa Ps- Harsidhi Dist- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate :
Ms. Harsha Shashwat, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 28-04-2026 Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 17.10.2025 in connection with Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 129 of 2014, F.I.R. dated 28.02.2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 394 of Indian Penal Code and 27 of Arms Act.
3. According to prosecution case, it is alleged that the when the informant along with his colleague were present in the office of Pump, then the petitioner along with other co-accused person came one a motorcycle and on point of pistol demanded money from them. The accused persons took Rs. 91,500/- from the safe kept in office and Rs. 7000/- from the pocket of informant and Rs. 4500/- from his colleague.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28726 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026 2/3 petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name transpired during investigation on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused person, namely, Anish Kumar Singh and except the confessional statement of co-accused person , no other cogent material has come during investigation which suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. He next submits that nothing have been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner or from his house and till date no TIP has been conducted by the prosecution. He further submits that the petitioner was remanded in the present case from Harsidhi P.S. Case No. 634 of 2025 after lapse of 12 years.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries seven criminal antecedents other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of the bail application that the petitioner is on bail in four cases and three cases are pending for consideration before competent Court of law.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28726 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026 3/3 amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate-I Class, Sadar, Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 129 of 2014, subject to the following conditions:- i. 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. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. 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) Suruchi/- U T