Patna High Court
Khurshid SiddiquiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
Holding
The court held that bail must be granted as the petitioner was not named in the FIR, no material was recovered from his possession, and the seized motorcycle was not the instrument of the alleged robbery.
Summary
Khurshid Siddiqui was arrested in a case of alleged robbery under Section 392 of the IPC, where two unknown persons on gunpoint allegedly looted Rs.3,50,000 from a motorcyclist. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, was not named in the FIR, no stolen money or the alleged motorcycle was recovered from his possession, and the bike seized by police was his personal vehicle unrelated to the crime. He also argued that no TIP had been conducted and he had no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, but the court examined the FIR, seizure list, and the impugned order and found no material linking the petitioner to the offence. Consequently, the court ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, directing compliance with the ACJM‑VI, Sitamarhi.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case under Section 392 IPC given the lack of direct evidence linking him to the offence.
- Whether the absence of the petitioner's name in the FIR and the non‑recovery of stolen property from his possession justify bail.
- Whether the seizure of a motorcycle belonging to the petitioner, which was not used in the alleged crime, affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 392
Subjects
- bail
- robbery
- Section 392 IPC
- FIR
- seizure list
- TIP
- presumption of innocence
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2875 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-170 Year-2020 Thana- RIGA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Khurshid Siddiqui, aged about 31 years, Gender- Male, S/o- Satar Siddiki @
Sattar Siddiqui @ Santar Siddiqui, Resident of Villager- Berbas Ward No. 7,
P.S.- Dumra, Dist- Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subodh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Anita Kumari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is in custody in a case registered for
the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. As per allegations in the FIR, while the informant
was proceeding to Sitamarhi on his motorcycle, two unknown
persons on the gunpoint looted a sum of Rs.3,50,00/- from him
and thereafter they fled away from the place of occurrence.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this
case due to pressure by police. He further submits there is no
recovery from the conscious possession of the petitioner.
Moreover, the alleged motorcycle which was used in the said
crime is still not traced and as per the seizure list, the
motorcycle recovered by the police is petitioner’s personal
motorcycle, which was not used in the alleged crime and this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2875 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/2
fact is evident from perusal of seizure list and FIR. He further
submits that the petitioner is not even named in the FIR rather
his name appeared only on the basis of suspicion. He further
submits that no TIP has been conducted by the officials till now.
Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of
the petition and he is in custody since 19.10.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
the bail of the petitioner.
6. On perusal of FIR, seizure list dated 18.10.2025
and impugned order dated 24.12.2025, it appears that petitioner
is not named in the FIR and neither there is any recovery from
the conscious possession of the petitioner nor the alleged
motorcycle from which the crime has been committed belongs
to the petitioner, so let the above named petitioner be released
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 ACJM-VI, Sitamarhi in connection with Riga P.S. Case
no.- 170 of 2020.
(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)
Brajesh Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…