Saroj Quraishi @ Seraj Quraishi @ Md. Seraj Ali v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51578 of 2025 Arising out of PS. Case No.-128 Year-2025 Thana- DAUDNAGAR District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Saroj Quraishi @ Seraj Quraishi @ Md. Seraj Ali S/O Md. Wakil Quraishi Resident of Pirahi Bagh, P.S.- Daud Nagar, District- Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Raj Krishna Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s:
Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 11-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case instituted for the offences under Sections 190, 191 (2), 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 303(1), 351(2), 352, 324(5) of the BNSS, 2023. He has no criminal antecedent.
3. As per the prosecution case, the named accused persons intercepted the vehicle of the informant and they all came armed with sharp edged weapons and dashed the informant's car. It is further alleged that the petitioner namely Saroj Quraishi @ Seraj Quraishi @ Md. Seraj Ali hit the informant's head with a sharp weapon and locked the friend of the informant in the room.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
2/4 petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and the allegations levelled in the FIR is not corroborated by the injury report sustained by the informant. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court towards the injury report wherein the injuries sustained by the informant was found to be simple in nature caused by hard and blunt substance. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious physical possession of the petitioner and the petitioner has clean antecedent.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid submission of learned counsel, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Daudnagar in connection with Daudnagar P.S. Case No. 128 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of
3/4 BNSS as well as subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the Court below, if so required by the learned Trial Court.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be canceled by the Court concerned.
(iv) And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of the same or in the name of verification.
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made
4/4 in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial. (Sourendra Pandey, J) Vikash/- U T