Patna High CourtCR. MISC./30360/2026bail granted

Washim Akhtar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-05-13Mr. Justice Purnendu Singh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30360 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-355 Year-2025 Thana- LAURIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Washim Akhtar S/o Md. Yejal Resident Of Village - Shankar Saraiya, Tola, Tansariya, Ps. - Turkauliya, Dist. - East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Bharat Lal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-05-2026 Heard Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Bharat Lal, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Lauriya P.S. Case No. 355 of 2025 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 317(5) of the BNS and Sections 11(1)(a),11(1)(d),(f),(H) of the Prevention of cruelty to Animals Act.

3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that six oxen, along with a vehicle bearing registration no. BR05GC-6605, were seized by police officials while being transported in a cruel and inhuman manner.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30360 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026 2/3 falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the petitioner was merely the driver of the said vehicle, and the animals were the purchased property of the owner of the vehicle. However, due to non-fulfilment of the illegal gratification demanded, the vehicle and the animals were seized and the present case was instituted. It is also submitted that the owner of the vehicle has already been granted bail by the learned District Court. On these grounds, the petitioner seeks to be released on pre-arrest bail.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.

6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation made in the FIR and the fact that petitioner is merely the driver of the said vehicle and owner of the said vehicle has already been released on bail by the learned District Court, I am of the opinion that petitioner has, prima facie, made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.

7. The petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned District Court within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30360 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026 3/3 Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Bettiah, West Champaran / Concerned Court in connection with Lauriya P.S. Case No. 355 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

8. The learned District Court is directed to verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that the petitioner is involved in some other cases, as what has been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail application, this order will automatically lose its force.

(Purnendu Singh, J) Sanjay/- U T