Ulfat Ansari @ Ulfat Siddiqui v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65280 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2025 Thana- VIJAYEPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== 1.
Ulfat Ansari @ Ulfat Siddiqui, Son of Riyashat Siddiqui; 2.
Zaitun Nesha, W/o Ulfat Siddiqui;
3.
Mainuddin Siddiqui @ Mainuddin Ansari, Son Ulfat Siddiqui; 4.
Sibi Khatun, W/o Meraj Siddiqui;
All are Resident of Village - Jagdispur P.S. - Vijaipur, District - Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Anand Vardhan, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Rina Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Vijaypur Town P.S. Case No. 62 of 2025 registered for the offence(s) under Section(s) 137 and 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.).
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that the named accused persons including the
2/4 petitioners, all with common intention, had kidnapped his daughter with an intention to sell her off. It is an admitted case of the informant that his daughter was missing since 04.03.2025, however an application in this regard was filed on 08.03.2025.
4. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they have falsely been implicated in this case and, in fact, the present case is not a case of kidnapping rather the daughter of the informant has gone out of her own free will along with the son of petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 as they are in love. It has further been submitted that the informant has falsely stated the age of the victim to be 16 years; rather from perusal of Annexure-2, i.e., the 10th examination result of the daughter of the informant, it would be evident that the girl was more than 18 years of age and she has gone along with co-accused/Niraj Siddiqui and the petitioners have no concern whatsoever with the same. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioners have clean antecedents and they have been merely implicated in this case because they happen to be the mother, father, brother and the sister-in-law of the main accused/Niraj Siddiqui.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners and has submitted
3/4
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the petitioners, above-named, be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the concerned Court/successor Court within a period of four weeks from today, on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court/successor Court where the case is pending in connection with Vijaypur Town P.S. Case No. 62 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with corresponding Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.S.)
as well as subject to the following conditions : (i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be their close relative and the other shall be a local resident. (ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present before the concerned Court on each and every date of the trial and shall cooperate in the investigation. (iii) In case of absence for two consecutive occasions or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the concerned Court.
(iv) The concerned Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case, at any stage, it is found that he has concealed their criminal antecedent, the Court concerned shall take necessary steps for cancellation
4/4 of their bail bond. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J) Praveen-II/- U T