Imamuddin @ Imamudin v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54724 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-85 Year-2025 Thana- MANJHI District- Saran ====================================================== Imamuddin @ Imamudin S/o Lal Mohammad R/o Village - Tajpur , P.S - Manjhi, District- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Koshalendra Rai, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs.Sangeeta Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-10-2025

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

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 118(2), 303(2), 76, 352, 351(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on 10.03.2025 at 11:00 P.M. the brother-in-law of the informant (petitioner) entered the house and tried to commit rape and when alarm was raised, the petitioner started assaulting her and even thrown her one year old child on the ground, further Shehnaz Khatoon and Saheb Hussain, on hearing alarm came to save her when they were also assaulted by the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54724 of 2025(3) dt.13-10-2025 2/3 and Sabrun Khatoon and Johara Khatoon threatened not to disclose the occurrence to anyone.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that petitioner along with his wife and mother have been implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is also submitted that petitioner along with his wife and mother are residing in the same house in which the informant resides and they also came to be implicated only to coerce the petitioner into submission as there is land dispute in between the parties. It is further submitted that petitioner during the course of investigation was given the privilege of section 35 of the BNSS and he cooperated with the police in the investigation and the police never felt the need of arresting him but then in a mechanical manner chargesheet came to be submitted. It is submitted that since the police during the course of investigation never felt the need of arresting the petitioner whether it would be prudent for the Court to send the petitioner to jail based on the fact that chargesheet came to be submitted and cognizance taken.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54724 of 2025(3) dt.13-10-2025 3/3

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) 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 Manjhi P.S. Case No. 85 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of BNSS.

7.

Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) pallavi/- U T