Md Faijan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56871 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-185 Year-2024 Thana- MEHANDIGANJ District- Patna ====================================================== Md Faijan Son of Imtiyaj R/o Village - Bagh Kalu Khan, P.S. - Chowk, Distt. - Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jay Ram Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Madhura Nand Jha, APP For the informant :

Mr. Shivendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 27-08-2025 Heard Mr. Jay Ram Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Shivendra Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Mehandiganj P.S. Case No. 185 of 2024 instituted under Sections 309(4) & 310(2) of Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 lodged on 17.12.2024 by the informant, Savita Devi.

3. As per the prosecution story, the lady alleged that on 17.12.2024, in the evening, some unknown persons knocked the door. As she opened it, the accused forcibly stormed in the house and locked in the room. Despite raising alarm, no one came to their rescue. Later, her son came and opened the door when she could see that the accused persons have taken away all the ornaments/cash of Rs.1,50,000/-. This led to the FIR.

4. Subsequently, the Police investigated the matter

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56871 of 2025(2) dt.27-08-2025 2/2 and with the help of CCTV reached the door of Md. Chand @ Maya Bhai. He was picked up and on his confessional statement, the role of the petitioner cropped up. There is recovery also from the persons who were arrested.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his name has come in the confessional statement beside that neither there is any recovery nor any criminal antecedent.

6. Learned APP as also learned counsel for the informant submit that the chain is completed, in the CCTV Md. Chand has surfaced, upon arrest, recovery is also there, he has confessed the role of the petitioner. As the petitioner is missing, further investigation on his role could not be ascertained.

7. Considering the submissions of the parties as also the way the innocent are being thrashed and their valuable hard earned life time ornaments, cash are being taken away by the accused persons, the role of the petitioner has come up on the confessional statement from whom the recovery is also there, in that background, this Court is not inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail which is accordingly rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T