Md. Naushad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58186 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2017 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Md. Naushad S/o Md. Zakki Ahmed R/o vill - Benibad, P.S. - Gaighat, Distt.- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Murli Dhar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-03-2026

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 offence punishable under Section 382 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of six cases and the informant alleges that on 26.01.2017, at about 09:00 p.m., he was travelling alone in his Scorpio and was heading towards Lalganj when at around 10:30 p.m. a Black Silver Scorpio overtook his vehicle and two persons were sitting in the Scorpio, whose faces were visible in the torch light, and asked him to stop and said that Saheb was calling him so he got out of the vehicle thereafter the two accused took him in their vehicle and two other accused took his vehicle towards Anjanpir and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58186 of 2025(4) dt.23-03-2026 2/3 thereafter they dropped him near Naga Police Station.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR is against unknown and the name of the petitioner transpired during the course of investigation based on the confessional statement of apprehended accused in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value in the eye of law.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner has antecedent of six cases and it is a case of road robbery and the case is of the year 2017.

6. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that on the date of occurrence, the petitioner was in judicial custody on which learned A.P.P. submits that the same is an aspect of investigation as to whether the petitioner from the jail got the occurrence committed or not.

7. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P. for the State and taking into consideration the fact that petitioner has antecedent of six cases and the case is of the year 2017, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No. 31 of 2017 pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hajipur at

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58186 of 2025(4) dt.23-03-2026 3/3 Vashali/Successor Court.

8. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T