Md. Hasib Ansari @ Hasib Ansari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62464 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-148 Year-2024 Thana- KURSAILA District- Katihar ====================================================== Md. Hasib Ansari @ Hasib Ansari S/o Md. Hanif R/o- M.T.Toal, Devipur, P.S.- Kursela, Distt.- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-12-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on 04.08.2024, her daughter went towards the DJ being played in a marriage event, but she did not return, thereafter a hectic search was made, but the victim could not be traced, thereafter on 06.08.2024, the dead body of the victim was found in a mutilated condition, thus the informant suspects that the FIR named accused persons including unknown accused committed rape and murder of his daughter.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62464 of 2025(4) dt.12-12-2025 2/3
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R., it would manifest that petitioner is not named in the FIR. It is further submitted that name of the petitioner transpired in the confessional statement of Golu in police custody, which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence and the post mortem report does not record any external injury rather cause of death has been recorded as asphyxia and shock due to antemortem drowning. It is also submitted that on the date of occurrence, there was a marriage event in the house of Golu, son of Md. Mursil, as such, it does not appear probable that on the eve of marriage, the named accused persons would have committed the occurrence.
It is next submitted that petitioner is in custody since 09.06.2025. It is reiterated and submitted that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and will not abscond rather will cooperate in the trial to prove his innocence. It is also submitted that Md. Mursil alias Md. Mansur and Golu Ansari @ Rahul Ansari had approached this Court seeking regular bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.32494 of 2025 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 18.07.2025 passed by a learned Coordinate Bench.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62464 of 2025(4) dt.12-12-2025 3/3 confession the name of the petitioner transpired has already been granted the privilege of regular bail, as such, the case of the petitioner is on a better footing.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the bail application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Kursela P. S. Case No.148 of 2024
7. The application stands allowed.
8. However, it is made clear that if the learned trial court comes to a conclusion that petitioner after his release is trying the delay the framing of charge or after framing of charge is trying to delay the trial in both the condition, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner. (Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T