Zakir Ansari @ Jahir Ansari @ Jahir v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42930 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-440 Year-2025 Thana- SISWAN District- Siwan ====================================================== Zakir Ansari @ Jahir Ansari @ Jahir Son of Late Kasim Ansari @ Late Kuasim Ansari Resident of village - Gayaspur, Police Station - Siswan, District - Siwan.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 01-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 27, 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the petitioner, along with others being armed with weapons, arrived at the door of the informant and started firing indiscriminately. It is further alleged that one of the gunshots hit the nephew of the informant, namely, Sukrit Yadav, in his stomach, who died during the course of treatment.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that from perusal of the FIR, it is clear that the allegation

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42930 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026 2/2 is that the petitioner, along with others, has made indiscriminate firing. This goes to show no one was aimed. He further submits that only one gunshot injury was received by the nephew of the informant. He further submits that the petitioner is not a resident of the same village, he has been framed in this case only with a view to settle scores. Moreover, a statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 27.04.2026.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VII, Siwan in connection with Siswan P.S. Case No. 440 of 2025.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U T