Md. Rehan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73578 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-99 Year-2025 Thana- SAKRI District- Madhubani ====================================================== Md. Rehan S/o Md. Taiyab R/o Village- Jarhatiya, Mali Tol, P.S.- Sakri, District- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Tarun Prasad Mandal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 10-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Sakri P.S. Case No. 99 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 329(3), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2), (3), 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 25(1-b)a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. As per prosecution case, co-accused Md. Ibrahim, Md. Nihal Akhtar and Md. Dilshad surrounded the informant's son. It is alleged that on the point of pistol, coaccused Md. Ibrahim snatched Rs. 10,000/- (in cash) and gold chain worth Rs. 86,000/- from the informant's son. Thereafter, petitioner and other, armed with pistol, reached at the house of informant and co-accused Md. Ibrahim, Md. Nehal, Md.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73578 of 2025(2) dt.10-11-2025 2/3 Dilshad and petitioner are said to have made five to six round firing upon the informant, but the informant escaped unhurt.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of playing cricket in orchard scuffle took place between both sides and the present case has been falsely lodged against the petitioner. Petitioner has nothing to do with the alleged occurrence. He further submits that though the efforts have been made to compromise the case, but the dispute has not been settled. He further submits that from the perusal of FIR itself, if appears that no one has sustained injury and the entire prosecution story has been framed just to falsely implicate the petitioner in the present case. He further submits that on similar and identical allegation, co-accused Nihal Akhtar and Md. Dilshad have already been granted anticipatory bail by the Coordinate Benches of this Court vide Cr. Misc. No.70502 of 2025 and 65770 of 2025 respectively and on the principle of parity, petitioner also deserves anticipatory bail. Petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in the FIR. Petitioner bears no criminal antecedent.

5. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner by submitting that there is specific allegation of firing against the petitioner and he

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73578 of 2025(2) dt.10-11-2025 3/3 cannot escape from the allegation made in FIR.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, keeping in view clean antecedent of petitioner, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, co-accused have already been granted anticipatory bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Madhubani in connection with Sakri P.S. Case No. 99 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2)of BNSS.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) alok/- U T