Patna High Court
Aquib Hashmi @ Akib HashmiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that the cheating allegation was not prima facie convincing and granted bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Aquib Hashmi was arrested in connection with a case alleging that he cheated the informant's daughter of gold jewellery worth Rs.15 lakh, under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner contended that the relationship was consensual, the jewellery was deposited with Muthoot Finance with the daughter's consent, and the FIR was filed to obstruct their relationship, noting inconsistencies in the informant's statements. The State, represented by the Additional Public Prosecutor, argued that the cheating allegation was specific to the petitioner, though no complaint was filed by the alleged victim. The court examined the prima facie weakness of the cheating allegation and the petitioner’s involvement in another case, and consequently ordered his release on bail. Bail was granted upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations of cheating under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita constitute a prima facie case justifying denial of bail
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 316(2), 318(4), 3(5)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- bail
- cheating
- gold jewellery
- false case
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 BNSS
- criminal procedure
- fraud
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10820 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-448 Year-2025 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR TOWN District-
Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Aquib Hashmi @ Akib Hashmi, S/o Md. Hashmi @ Md. Hashim, R/o
Chandwara Azad Road, Darji Tola, P.S.- Town, Distt.- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Advocate
Mrs.Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State duly assisted by
learned counsel appearing for informant.
2. The accused/petitioner is named in the FIR and
apprehending his arrest in connection with Muzaffarpur Town
P.S. Case No.448 of 2025 registered under Sections 316(2),
and 318(4) read with 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 (in short ‘B.N.S.’).
3. Allegation against petitioner is to cheat the
daughter of informant the gold jewellery worth of Rs.15 lakhs
after developing friendship with her.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10820 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
2/4
petitioner that the daughter of informant was in love with this
petitioner and as the affair could not approved by the parents,
the present false case was lodged. It is submitted that in fact
the gold jewelleries in issue was taken by the daughter of
informant herself, which under her consent was deposited
with M/s. Muthoot Finance. It is submitted that later on during
investigation, the daughter of informant communicated to the
SHO, Katra Police Station, Muzaffarpur that petitioner is her
husband and he has been falsely implicated with present case
and the statement to that effect was also filed before the
court of CJM, Muzaffarpur. Arguing further, it is submitted
that the vagueness of allegation can be gathered safely, as
while concluding the FIR, the informant said that the gold,
which alleged to be taken away by her daughter was worth of
Rs.80-90 lakhs and this variation in statement prima facie
suggest that it was lodged with oblique motive primarily as
informant was not willing to approve the relationship, as
submitted aforesaid. It is submitted that petitioner found
involved in one more criminal case, which was lodged by the
husband of informant regarding kidnapping of his daughter
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10820 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
3/4
Halima Fatima, who claimed herself as wife of this petitioner.
5. Learned APP duly assisted by Mr. Jharkhandi
Upadhyay, learned counsel appearing for the informant while
opposing the prayer of bail submitted that the allegation is
specifically available against this petitioner, who cheated the
daughter of informant but fairly conceded that no complaint in
this regard was made by the victim, who is the daughter of
informant.
6. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of overall nature of accusation, where allegation
of cheating prima facie not appears convincing, coupled with
the fact that petitioner appears in litigating terms with
husband of informant, as mentioned aforesaid, accordingly,
the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or
surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks
from today, is directed to be released on bail 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in connection
with Muzaffarpur Town P.S. Case No.448 of 2025, subject to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10820 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
4/4
the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code
of Criminal Procedure (in short ‘CrPC’)/under Section 482(2)
of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short
‘BNSS’).
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
Sanjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…