Md. Yusuf v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77133 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2025 Thana- LAUKAHI District- Madhubani ====================================================== Md. Yusuf, S/o Md. Yunus, R/o Village- Jholan Piprahi, P.S.- Ladaniya, District- Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Jagnnath Singh, Advocate Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate Mr. Padmanabh Kashyap, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, apprehending his arrest, in connection with Laukahi P.S. Case No. 121 of 2025 (G.R. S.C. No.-1052 of 2025), dated.04.06.2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 126(2), 115(2), 76, 77, 352 & 351(2) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per allegation, the accused/Petitioner used to ask the informant to get the divorce of his daughter and get her married with him. It is further alleged that on account of some instigation by the Petitioner, his daughter was deserted by her
2/4 husband and left her at the house of the Informant/father. It is further alleged that subsequently, the Petitioner came to the house of the Informant and altercation took place between him and the Informant and when the daughter of the Informant came out of his house, her modesty was outraged by the Petitioner and the informant was also threatened to make indecent photograph of his daughter viral.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that as a matter of fact, the Informant/father wants to get his daughter married to the Petitioner and when he refused to do so, this false case has been lodged. He further submits that as a matter of fact, she is still not divorced by her husband. He also submits that the maximum punishment for the penal sections applied in the FIR is much below seven years of imprisonment. He also submits that the Petitioner is ready to co-operate in the investigation.
5. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one in the instant case.
6. It has further been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail petition that the petitioner has been made accused in one
3/4 other case.
7. However, learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the Petitioner for bail.
8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this petition is allowed, directing the petitioner, above-named, to be enlarged on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order, on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000 /- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned concerned Court below, in connection with Laukahi P.S. Case No. 121 of 2025 (G.R. S.C. No.-1052 of 2025), subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482
(2) of the B.N.S.S 2023, and on the following conditions: (i) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that the petitioner has any criminal antecedents, other than the disclosed one, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after hearing him and getting satisfied that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents despite his knowledge of the same.
(ii) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong,
4/4 learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner. (Jitendra Kumar, J.) Chandan/- U T