Patna High CourtCR. MISC./951/2026disposed

Rashid Iqbal v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-30Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.951 of 2026 In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52180 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-309 Year-2021 Thana- MOKAMAH District- Patna ====================================================== Rashid Iqbal Son of Mohammad Shafi R/O- House No 385, New Patliputra Colony, Road No 3j, Near Masjid, P.S- Phulwari, District- Patna, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Ram Pravesh Kumar son of Late Ram Nandan singh Resident Of VillageMarachi, Ps- Marachi, Dist- Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dayanand Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 30-01-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The present application has been preferred under Section 528 of the BNS invoking the inherent powers of this Hon'ble Court for the purpose of modifying one of the conditions imposed vide order dated 12.01.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 52180 of 2022, whereby the Hon'ble Court while allowing anticipatory bail to the present petitioner in connection with Mokameh P.S. Case No. 309/2021, had directed that the petitioner shall surrender his passport before the Learned ACJM-II, Barh.

3. The relief was granted to the petitioner on 12.01.2023 in Cr. Misc. No. 52180 of 2022 and one of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.951 of 2026(3) dt.30-01-2026 2/2 condition was to surrender the passport before the concerned Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is in a concern and for that, he may have to go abroad and as such, surrendering of passport is hampering his future.

5. Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh represent the State and he submits that there is nothing on record to show that he made any application before the concerned Court for the release of the passport for a particular period and/or the same was rejected.

6. This Court finds force in the submission of learned APP. The petitioner when needed can very well approach the concerned Court for the release of passport for a particular period and only because a vague statement has been made that he may have to go abroad cannot be the reason to remove the said clause in the relief granted to the petitioner earlier.

7. The Cr. Misc. No. 951 of 2026 is disposed of with aforesaid observation.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U