Md. Kalam @ Kalam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37892 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-91 Year-2026 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

Md. Kalam @ Kalam Son of Late Harun Quraisi Resident of Mohalla - Lal Kothi Near Kurban Ke Masjid, Ward No. 13, Police Station Dananpur, District-Patna 2.

Md. Samsad @ Md. Shamsad @ Gope Son of Annu Quaraisi Resident of Mohalla - Lal Kothi Near Kurban Ke Masjid, Ward No. 13, Police Station Dananpur, District-Patna 3.

Md. Sahil Son of Md. Kalam @ Kalam Resident of Mohalla - Lal Kothi Near Kurban Ke Masjid, Ward No. 13, Police Station Dananpur, DistrictPatna 4.

Md. Akbar Son of Md. Kalam @ Kalam Resident of Mohalla - Lal Kothi Near Kurban Ke Masjid, Ward No. 13, Police Station Dananpur, DistrictPatna 5.

Md. Javed @ Md. Jawed Son of Md. Kalam @ Kalam Resident of Mohalla - Lal Kothi Near Kurban Ke Masjid, Ward No. 13, Police Station Dananpur, District-Patna 6.

Pravej @ Pervej Son of Md. Kalam @ Kalam Resident of Mohalla - Lal Kothi Near Kurban Ke Masjid, Ward No. 13, Police Station Dananpur, District-Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arun, Advocate Mr. Md. Anwar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Asha Kumari, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-06-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, after some arguments, seeks permission to withdraw the anticipatory bail application with respect to petitioners no. 3 and 4, namely, Md. Sahil and Md. Akbar.

2/4

3. Permission is accorded.

4. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application with respect to petitioners no. 3 and 4 is dismissed as withdrawn.

5. The petitioners no. 1, 2, 5 and 6 apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 317(5), 325 and 3(5) of the BNS as well as Sections 11, 12 and 13 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, 1960.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners no. 1, 2, 5 and 6 have antecedent of one case and the informant alleges that Rakesh came to the police station on 24.01.2026 at 02:00 p.m. and gave a written complaint alleging that three cows were stolen from his cowshed on 22.01.2026, accordingly, Rakesh went to the butchers area on 24.01.2026 where seven named accused persons including the petitioners assaulted him by Daab and Chapar, hence, Danapur P.S. Case No. 87 of 2026 dated 24.01.2026 was instituted on written complaint of Rakesh, accordingly, the informant along with police force reached the place of occurrence to investigate on 24.01.2026 and saw the situation tensed, hence, the informant went to the house of the accused persons of Danapur P.S. Case No. 87 of 2026 but they were not present and people disclosed that they commit theft of animal and sell meat after killing them,

3/4 accordingly, search was made and calves were recovered from the shop of Md. Firoz and Md. Kalam as detailed in the FIR and from shop of Gope a cow was recovered, hence, the FIR was instituted.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that allegation of assault is general and omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that though, it is alleged that calves and a cow were recovered from the shop of Md. Firoz and Md. Kalam along with Gope but then Md. Firoz and Gope are not the petitioners in the instant case and Md. Kalam is a senior citizen aged about 60 years and is a differently abled person and he came to be implicated with general and omnibus allegation when even the shop does not belong to him.

8. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners no. 1, 2, 5 and 6 .

9. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, let the petitioners no. 1, 2, 5 and 6 , above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of

4/4 Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 91 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T