Patna High Court
Asgar Ali @ Munna @ Munna MiyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioners with specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, a group of individuals from Khujwa village, sought anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 209/2025 alleging offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including assault, robbery and alleged sexual assault. The prosecution alleged that on 4 August 2025 the petitioners, armed with weapons, assaulted and sexually assaulted an informant and stole valuables. The petitioners contended that the case was a retaliatory move arising from a long‑standing enmity and prior FIRs filed by them and the informant’s family, and argued that the injury report did not substantiate any sexual assault. The court examined the submissions and noted that the medical report showed only a simple bruise on the temporal region, insufficient to confirm sexual assault, and considered the mutual hostility between the parties. Accordingly, the court granted anticipatory bail with conditions of surrender within four weeks, a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, and a requirement that one bailor be a close family member, also allowing cancellation if the petitioners intimidate witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted despite allegations of serious offences including sexual assault under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the injury report corroborates the alleged sexual assault.
- Whether the existence of prior FIRs and the claim of mutual enmity affect the grant of bail.
- What conditions are appropriate for the anticipatory bail in this case.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 190, 191(2), 303(2), 351(2), 352, 74
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- sexual assault
- assault
- enmity
- FIR
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- bail conditions
- criminal law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91922 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-209 Year-2025 Thana- RAGHUNATHPUR District- Siwan
======================================================
Gulam Haidar S/O Asgar Ali @ Munna @ Munna Miya R/O Vill.- Khujwa,
P.S.- Raghunathpur, Dist.- Siwan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 238 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-209 Year-2025 Thana- RAGHUNATHPUR District- Siwan
======================================================
1. Asgar Ali @ Munna @ Munna Miya S/o Late Mansoor Miya @ Mansur Ali
R/o Village - Khujwa, P.S - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan
2. Riyasat Ali @ Reyasat Ali S/o Serajul Miya @ Serajuddin R/o Village -
Khujwa, P.S - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan
3. Saddam Hussain @ Saddam Hussain Ansari S/o Kasim @ Kasim Ansari R/o
Village - Khujwa, P.S - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan
4. Irfan @ Irfan Ali S/o Hasim @ Hasim Ansari R/o Village - Khujwa, P.S -
Raghunathpur, District - Siwan
5. Samir Miya @ Shamsher Ali @ Shamsher Miya S/o Ahmad Miya R/o
Village - Khujwa, P.S - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 91922 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Syed Mojibur Rahman, Adv.
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 238 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Syed Mojibur Rahman, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the
petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91922 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/5
State.
2. With the consent of the parties, both the bail
applications arising out of the same P.S. Case are being heard
together and disposed off by this common order.
3. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 209 of 2025,
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2),
190, 115(2), 74, 109, 351(2), 352 and 303(2) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
4. Based upon the written report the prosecution
alleges that in the night of 04.08.2025, the petitioners variously
armed with pistol, rod and lathi arrived at the house of the
informant. On exhortation of Shamsher Miya, accused Guddu,
Miya and Saif Ali threw the informant on the ground. It is
specifically alleged that the petitioners have sexually assaulted
the informant and further the petitioner of Criminal
Miscellaneous No. 91922 of 2025 alongwith Reyasat Ali
assaulted the informant by means of iron rod over her back and
shoulder. There is further allegation of snatching of valuables
and cash kept in the shop of the petitioner.
5. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submitted that the present case is nothing but an
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91922 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/5
outcome of previous enmity standing between the parties. Prior
to the said occurrence co-accused Saddam Ansari had lodged
Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 54 of 2025 dated 02.03.2025
against the informant of the present case and others, against
which the informant had lodged Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 55
of 2025 by making similar allegation of causing sexual assault.
It is further contended that subsequently on 02.08.2025, the
mother of co-accused Saddam Ansari had lodged Raghunathpur
P.S. Case No. 207 of 2025 on 02.08.2025 against the informant
and her family members and in order to put pressure upon all
the family members of the petitioners, the present FIR bearing
Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 209 of 2025 is instituted. The
present case is nothing but the counterblast of Raghunathpur
P.S. Case No. 207 of 2025. It is further contended that the
informant has also instituted Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 203 pf
2025. Moreover, the entire allegation falls to the ground for the
simple reason that no sexual assault has been corroborated by
the injury report and only one bruise and swelling with bleeding
in right temporal region was found, the nature of which is said
to be simple. The petitioner in Criminal Miscellaneous No.
91922 of 2025 is carrying fair antecedent whereas the
petitioners of Criminal Miscellaneous No. 238 of 2026 bear 1-2
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91922 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
4/5
antecedent, except petitioner nos. 2 and 5 of the said case.
6. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
and the learned Advocate for the informant vehemently opposed
the pre-arrest bail application and submits that there is a specific
accusation against all the petitioners, specially petitioner Gulam
Haidar and Guddu Miya, who have sexually assaulted the
informant and earlier also they were involved in committing the
crime upon the informant and her family members and, as such,
the petitioners do not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. Having considered the submissions advanced by
learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of
the fact that the injury report does not support the allegation of
sexual assault and moreover the injury which has been found
over the temporal region is simple in nature. The enmity is a two
edged sword which may cut both the sides, besides prior to the
institution fo the present case, there is an FIR instituted by the
petitioner’s side bearing Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 207 of
2025, let the petitioners above named be released on bail, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a
period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a
copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-
(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91922 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
5/5
satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate in connection with
Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 209 of 2025, with the further
following conditions:-
(i) That one of the bailors shall be the own/close
family members of the petitioners.
(ii)If the petitioner is found involved in
intimidating/threatening the witnesses or the informant or would
indulge in such activities in future, the informant/State shall be
at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of their
bail bond(s).
(Harish Kumar, J)
supratim/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.