Md. Arman @ Mohammad Arman v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33281 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-126 Year-2026 Thana- SULTANGANJ District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== 1.
Md. Arman @ Mohammad Arman, S/o Md. Rustam Rayeen @ Md. Bablu, R/o Village- Dilgouri, P.S- Sultanganj, District- Bhagalpur. 2.
Gudiya Devi @ Afsana Khatoon, W/o Md. Rustam Rayeen @ Md. Bablu, R/o Village- Dilgouri, P.S- Sultanganj, District- Bhagalpur. 3.
Md. Bablu @ Md. Rustam Rayeen, S/o Barati Miyan @ Barati Rayeen @ Md. Barati, R/o Village- Dilgouri, P.S- Sultanganj, District- Bhagalpur. 4.
Muskan Ajmeri @ Muskan, D/o Md. Bablu @ Md. Rustam Rayeen, R/o Village- Dilgouri, P.S- Sultanganj, District- Bhagalpur. 5.
Md. Chand @ Md. Nisar, S/o Barati Miyan @ Md. Barati @ Barati Rayeen, R/o Village- Dilgouri, P.S- Sultanganj, District- Bhagalpur. 6.
Muskan Ajmeri @ Ajmeri Khatoon, D/o Md. Bablu @ Md. Rayeen, W/o Md. Abid, R/o Maidan Chowk Koda, P.S.- Koda, Distt.- Munger. At present residing at Village- Dilgouri, P.S.- Sultanganj, Distt.- Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ankit Raj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 20-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual mode.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Sultanganj P.S. Case No. 126 of 2026, registered for the offence(s) under Section(s) 137(2) and 140(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.).
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that he found his wife missing on 19.02.2026 and the
2/4 FIR named accused persons including the petitioners, in criminal conspiracy, have lured his wife, and she had gone with them along with a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- which were withdrawn from the bank besides gold jewelries kept in the house.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case on false and concocted story of kidnapping. It has been further submitted that though the date of occurrence is stated to be 19.02.2026 but the FIR was lodged on 02.03.2026 i.e. after a delay of almost 19 days. It has next been submitted that the victim/wife of informant was recovered and she in her statement recorded under Section 183 of B.N.S.S., has not at all supported the case of prosecution rather she has categorically stated that she did not tell anybody that she was going to her myka at Gaya by train. In her statement, the victim/wife of informant has further stated that it was because of her husband/informant, who used to assault and abuse her, she had gone to her parents house.
It has also been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that all the allegations levelled against the petitioners are proved to be false on account of the statement of the victim/wife of informant recorded under Section 183 of B.N.S.S. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioners have clean antecedents.
3/4
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the petitioners, above-named, be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the concerned Court/successor Court within a period of four weeks from today, on their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount, each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court/successor Court where the case is pending in connection with Sultanganj P.S. Case No. 126 of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with corresponding Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.S.)
as well as subject to the following conditions : (i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be their close relative and the other shall be a local resident. (ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present before the concerned Court on each and every date of the trial and shall cooperate in the investigation.
4/4 concerned Court.
(iv) The concerned Court shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioners and in case, at any stage, it is found that they have concealed their criminal antecedents, the Court concerned shall take necessary steps for cancellation of their bail bonds. 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.
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J) krishna/deepak/- U T