Maqsood Ali @ Maqsood Ahmad v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6799 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2024 Thana- GANDHIMAIDAN District- Patna ====================================================== Maqsood Ali @ Maqsood Ahmad S/O Samiullah R/o - Katalpur, P.S - Baikunthpur, District - Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Pushpendra Priyedarshi For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Bharat Bhushan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-04-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of two cases and the informant alleges that she came to know that Saied Hussain and Sahnaj Hussain about eight years back and they requested for financial assistance showing a tender of ICICI Bank for Rs.60 Lacs, but informant refused as she was not having the requisite sum, hence they gave a proposal to invest half the amount and assured returns, thus she deposited an amount of Rs.24,50,000/- in the account of Saied Husssain and Sahnaj from her account
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6799 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026 2/3 and gave Rs.5,50,000/- in cash, but the accused persons did not return the amount rather gave a cheque which on presentation for encashment bounced. It is next submitted that thereafter the informant started enquiring when she came to know that accused persons are fraud as real name of Saied and Sahnaj is Mumtaz and Sanchita Banerji and Saied Hussain, who had introduced his brother by the name Mumtaz his real name is Maqsood Ali i.e. petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had earlier moved this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.14418 of 2025, but then the same was permitted to be withdrawn by an order dated 13.05.2025 with liberty to file a fresh as it was submitted by the learned A.P.P. after perusing the case diary that notice under Section 41(A) Cr.P.C. has been given to the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in terms of the aforesaid liberty the instant second anticipatory bail application has been filed.
5. On query of the Court as to whether charge-sheet has been submitted or not, on which it is fairly submitted that charge-sheet has not been submitted, but then non-bailable warrant of arrest has been issued on which learned A.P.P. Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad after perusing the order impugned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6799 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026 3/3 submits that petitioner was given notice under Section 41(A) Cr.P.C., but then he did not appear before the investigating Officer. It is also submitted that whether Saied Hussain is Mumtaz or Mumta is Maqsood Ali, the same requires to be investigated. It is further submitted that this perhaps explains why the petitioner despite receiving notice under Section 41(A) Cr.P.C. did not to appear and cooperated in the investigation.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to entertain the second anticipatory bail application.
7. The prayer of the petitioner for second anticipatory bail stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T