Saheb Anwar Quasmi @ Shahab Anwar Quasmi @ Mufti Sahab @ Sahab Anwar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71918 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2025 Thana- SINGHWARA District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Saheb Anwar Quasmi @ Shahab Anwar Quasmi @ Mufti Sahab @ Sahab Anwar Abdul Tauwab R/o Jagolia, P.S. - Aurai, District - Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ansul, Sr. Advocate Mr. Saobiya Mushtaque, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 15-11-2025 Heard Mr. Ansul, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. A prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the petitioner in connection with Singhwara P.S. Case no.133 of 2025 registered under sections 103(1) of the B.N.S and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the informant's husband was killed by some unknown miscreants.

4. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that F.I.R was lodged against unknown and the name of the petitioner has surfaced in this case only on account of a vague suspicion indicated in paragraph no.46 of the case diary wherein it has been stated that since the petitioner was interested in getting married with the daughter of the deceased, he got the deceased killed. Further, materials collected during course of investigation in paragraph no.137 of the case diary onwards containing the entire CDR details, would indicate that while other

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71918 of 2025(3) dt.15-11-2025 2/2 accused persons were having conversation with each other and the name of the petitioner as also his phone number do not feature at all, thereby indicating the fact that petitioner is no way involved in the entire occurrence. The petitioner is in custody since 05.06.2025 and undertakes to cooperate in the case/trial. Charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.

5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State.

6. Taking into consideration the above mentioned facts of the case and considering the fact that F.I.R was registered against unknown and name of the petitioner has transpired in this case only on suspicion, petitioner is in custody since 05.06.2025 and charge-sheet has been submitted in the case, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Singhwara P.S. Case no.133 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned concerned Court where the case is pending/Successor Court.

(Soni Shrivastava, J) Harsh/- U T