Shahid Ansari @ Md. Shahid Hussain @ Shahid Hussain v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63839 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2017 Thana- DURAULI District- Siwan ====================================================== Shahid Ansari @ Md. Shahid Hussain @ Shahid Hussain Son of Zameer Khan R/o Village - Dumri, P.S. - Manjhi, Dist - Saran at Chapra. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Chandra Mohan Jha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 17-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Darauli P.S. Case No.42 of 2017 registered for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 370, 120B, 34 of the IPC and Section 10/24 of Foreigners Act, 1983.
3. As per prosecution case, the informant alleged that Shahid Ansari and Meraj are agent, who used to send candidates to foreign country and thereafter the informant met to the agents, who suggested him to pay Rs.65,000/- and thereafter the informant send Rs. 20,000/- on the account of Niraj Tiwari and also gave Rs.45,000/- cash to Niraj Tiwari. Further alleged that Shahid Ansari took him to Chennai and after receiving his passport and visa he went to Maldives and began the work of centering in the Indra Awas Hospital in the supervision of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63839 of 2025(4) dt.17-01-2026 2/3 Shahnawaz, who is the brother-in-law of the Shahid Ansari and Shahnawaz forced to the informant to work for 10 hours. When the informant raised objection, they threatened him. Accordingly, the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence has falsely been implicated in this case due to ulterior motive and also petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the allegations as narrated in the FIR is totally false, baseless and concocted and there is inordinate delay in lodging the FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the date of occurrence has been shown in the FIR on 17.03.2016 whereas the case has been lodged on 03.03.2017 and no explanation of delay has been given in the FIR, which shows serious doubt about genuineness of the case.
5. The learned APP opposes the anticipatory bail application.
6. Considering the fact that offence is alleged to have been committed on 17.03.2016, but the FIR was lodged after almost a year on 03.03.2017 for which there doesn't appear to be any explanation and further considering the fact that it is the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63839 of 2025(4) dt.17-01-2026 3/3 case of the petitioner that the petitioner has been implicated due to wrong identification after eight years of lodging of the FIR, the probability of which cannot be ruled out, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Siwan in connection with Darauli P.S. Case No.42 of 2017, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./under Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) Prakash Narayan U T