Mumtaj Miyan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36052 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2026 Thana- SIRISIYA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Mumtaj Miyan S/o Mustaquim Miyan Resident of village - Laxmipur, P.S - Sirisiya, District - West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sharad Kumar Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nagendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 02-06-2026 The Court proceeding is being conducted through virtual mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

3. The petitioner who apprehends arrest in connection with Sirisiya P.S. Case No. 46 of 2026, lodged on 07.03.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2)/62 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

4. As per the prosecution, the F.I.R. has been lodged against the petitioner with allegation that theft of buffalo of the informant and the accused was identified by the wife of the informant.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36052 of 2026(2) dt.02-06-2026 2/2 that the petitioner is the co-villager and due to the enmity his name has figured in this case and his antecedent is clean. Counsel further submits that the alleged buffalo, which was subject to theft is still with the informant. He submits that the petitioner is man of reputation and he is ready to fulfill all the conditions whatsoever shall be imposed.

6. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the accused petitioner has been identified by the wife of the informant and upon her noise, the buffalo of the informant has been thrown from the vehicle.

7. Considering the fact that the wife of the informant has identified the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant the anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby refused. However, in the event of surrender of the petitioner within four weeks from today, the prayer for regular bail shall be considered on merit on the same day without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) Mkr./Bipin/- U T