Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ali Baks Anwar @ Chunnu AnsariversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner.

Summary

Ali Baks Anwar was arrested in connection with a case alleging conspiracy to murder Vijay Yadav and possession of arms, though only a mobile phone was recovered from him. He sought regular bail, claiming innocence and pointing out that a co-accused had already been granted bail in a similar case. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences under the B.N.S. Act and Arms Act and the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent. After hearing both sides, the Court considered the lack of incriminating material on the petitioner and the precedent of bail to a co-accused. The Court ordered the petitioner to be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite charges under Sections 111, 61(2) of the B.N.S. Act and Sections 25(1-a), 26, 35 of the Arms Act
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent warrants denial of bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Arms Act
  • criminal antecedent
  • regular bail
  • judicial custody
  • co-accused
  • sureties

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31813 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-580 Year-2025 Thana- BANJARIA District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Ali Baks Anwar @ Chunnu Ansari Son of Jabbar Ali @ Javar Ali Resident of
                 Areraj Behind Hall Ward No. 9, P.S.- Areraj, District - East Champaran.
                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                          ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Shakil Ahmad Khan, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-05-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State (through virtual mode).

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections 111, 61(2)

                   of the B.N.S. and 25(1-a), a 26, 35 of Arms Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that police

                   has input that some miscreants have gathered for committing

                   murder of one Vijay Yadav and his associates. The petitioner

                   along with two others was apprehended. It is alleged that from

                   possessions of co-accused, arms were recovered. From the

                   possession of this petitioner, only a mobile was recovered.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

                   committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

                   case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31813 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
                                                       2/2




                     the perusal of the FIR, it is clear that petitioner was merely

                     present and was apprehended. Nothing was recovered from his

                     possession. It has further been submitted that similarly situated

                     co-accused Ashutosh Kumar has already been granted bail by

                     learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Cr. Misc. Nol.

                     9059 of 2026. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since

                     18.11.2025.

                                  5. Learned APP appearing for the State has

                     vehemently opposed the application for bail and has submitted

                     that petitioner is having criminal antecedent of one case.

                                  6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                     considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

                     inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

                     petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

                     bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties

                     of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial

                     Magistrate 1st Class, Sadar at Motihari, East Champaran in

                     connection with Banjariya P.S. Case No. 580 of 2025.


                                                     (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

Lata/-
Nitu/-
U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.