Patna High Court
Md. Mozibul Haque @ NanheversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner subject to conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Mozibul Haque, was implicated in a murder case under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code, alleged to have induced an informant to deposit money for a surgical operation and subsequently demanded additional funds, after which the informant's wife and child died. The petitioner contended that he was merely a supervisory staff member at the clinic, had no role in inducing the informant or performing the surgery, and that the matter was being resolved through a compromise petition. The State opposed the petitioner's request for anticipatory bail, arguing the seriousness of the allegations. The High Court, noting the general and omnibus nature of the accusation, the petitioner's clean antecedents, and his limited involvement, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond and sureties. The order also imposed conditions under Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, should the petitioner be arrested within eight weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is liable under Section 304 IPC for the death of the informant's wife and child.
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner given the nature of the allegations.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 304
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 304 IPC
- medical negligence
- clean antecedents
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19816 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-657 Year-2023 Thana- MOTIHARI TOWN District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Md. Mozibul Haque @ Nanhe son of Mohammad Hasnain @ Md. Hasnain
Resident of Masjid Mohalla, Ward no 28, Baswariya, Ps- Bettiah Town, Dist-
West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Jagjit Roshan, Advocate
Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Jayant Kumar Ray, Advocate
Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate
Mr. Om Prakash Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 07-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 304 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that this
petitioner, along with co-accused Dr. Asiya Fatima, induced and
persuaded the informant to deposit Rs. 30,000/- for operation of
his pregnant wife. After depositing Rs. 30,000/-, the accused
persons further demanded Rs. 20,000/- more on 29.08.2023 and
the informant again deposited the same and after some time, the
doctor and the staff took wife of informant to the operation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19816 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
2/3
theater and started operation, however, they started telling the
informant that condition of his wife and the child is not good
and they need to be taken to Patna. When the informant went to
see his wife and the child, he saw that both of them died.
Informant alleges that due to negligence in not giving proper
treatment and carelessness in performing the surgery of this
petitioner and other co-accused persons, his wife and child died.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. As a matter of fact, petitioner is merely a
supervisory staff in the clinic in question. Petitioner neither
induced the informant to get the patient admitted in the clinic in
question nor he has taken any part in the operation of the wife of
informant. It is further submitted that when the informant
realized his mistake, he took recourse to resolve the issue by
filing a compromise petition before the learned Trial Court.
Petitioner claims clean antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, general and omnibus nature of accusation and clean
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19816 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
3/3
antecedents of the petitioner, the prayer for grant of anticipatory
bail to the petitioner is allowed.
7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within
a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named
petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.
10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Civil Court, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with
Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 657 of 2023, subject to condition as
laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S..
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…