Md. Jakir v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85660 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-237 Year-2025 Thana- SINGHESHWAR District- Madhepura ====================================================== 1.
Md. Jakir S/o Md. Ghurar Mian @ Md. Ghuran Mian Resident of VillageRampatti, Ward No. 10, P.S.- Singheshwar, District-Madhepura. 2.
Md. Almuddin S/o Late Md. Mohan Mian Resident of Village- Rampatti, Ward No. 10, P.S.- Singheshwar, District-Madhepura. 3.
Md. Makasud Alam S/o Late Imam Ali Resident of Village- Rampatti, Ward No. 10, P.S.- Singheshwar, District- Madhepura. 4.
Md. Subhan S/o Late Md. Yunush Resident of Village- Rampatti, Ward No. 10, P.S.- Singheshwar, District- Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rakesh Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-02-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 191(2), 126(2), 115(2), 352 and 351(2) of the BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are persons with clean antecedent and petitioner nos. 3 and 4 have antecedent of one case though inadvertently at Para-3 it has been pleaded that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent. It is next submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85660 of 2025(2) dt.02-02-2026 2/3 informant alleges that a Tazia fair was organized on a disputed land of Ramu Yadav and Suro, further he had gone to see the fair and was video recording the fair in his mobile, when petitioners along with 50-60 unknown accused abused and assaulted him on the pretext that he was videographing the women who had come in the fair.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that allegation of abuse and assault is general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that had so many accused abused and assaulted the informant, in that event informant would not have been in a position to institute the instant FIR. It is next submitted that since informant was videographing the women, as such, an objection was raised and an altercation had taken place, but then a false case came to be instituted.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85660 of 2025(2) dt.02-02-2026 3/3 within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Singheshwar P.S. Case No. 237 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T