Sarwar AliversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22161 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-696 Year-2025 Thana- KATEYA District- Gopalganj
                 ======================================================
                 Sarwar Ali S/O Sawkat Ali R/O Village- Jaipur, P.S- Kateya, Distt.-
                 Gopalganj.

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Ms. Eashita Raj
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Abhay Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   09-04-2026                  Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

                   Kateya P.S. Case No. 696 of 2025 registered for the offence

                   under Section(s) 318(4), 316(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya

                   Sanhita, 2023.

                                3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and co-

                   accused Abdul Kadir provided a tourist visa to the informant

                   and one Mukesh Yadav on the pretext of sending them abroad

                   and took Rs. 2 lakh from each person. They stated that the

                   informant and Mukesh Yadav were being sent to Russia for two

                   years. However, when the informant and Mukesh Yadav arrived

                   abroad and made inquiries at the airport, they came to know that

                   they had been sent to Kyrgyzstan on a tourist visa. There, their
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22161 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
                                            2/3




          passports were seized, and they were asked to pay Rs. 50,000

          for their return. They paid the amount, after which their

          passports were returned. Thereafter, the informant and Mukesh

          Yadav returned to India.

                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

          petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. She

          further submits that the petitioner is a local person and is not

          involved in sending people abroad. She also submits that the

          petitioner's brother had gone to Kyrgyzstan, and the informant

          and others had approached the petitioner as they were interested

          in going there for work. Thereafter, the petitioner spoke with his

          brother, who asked them to get their passports made and come

          to Kyrgyzstan. They went there after completing the necessary

          documentation, but since they were unable to work in the cold

          environment, they returned and filed a false case and the brother

          working in Kyrgyzstan is also accused in this case. Lastly, it is

          submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 08.02.2026 and

          there is general and omnibus allegation against him.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for bail.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          and the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner as
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22161 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      well as the period of custody, this application for regular bail is

                      allowed.

                                   7. Accordingly, let the petitioner, above named, be

                      released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten

                      Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

                      satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is

                      pending/successor Court in connection with Kateya P.S. Case

                      No. 696 of 2025.

                                   8. It is made clear that any observation made herein is

                      prima facie in nature and limited solely for the purpose of

                      adjudication of the present bail application. Such observations

                      shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case

                      and shall not influence the trial or any other proceedings in any

                      manner.



                                                              (Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-

U       T