Patna High Court
Md. Jamilluddin Ahmad @ JamilluddinversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Jamilluddin Ahmad, was intercepted by police while transporting four oxen in a Tata ACE Magic vehicle and was implicated under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Bihar Prevention and Improvement of Animal Act, and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act. He contended that he was a bona‑fide purchaser of the oxen, possessed valid purchase documents, and faced no allegation of cruelty, seeking anticipatory bail under Section 35(3) of the BNSS. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The High Court, after considering the facts and the petitioner’s clean antecedent, granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order emphasized that the bail conditions are enforceable and that any observations made would not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances.
- Whether the petitioner is a bona‑fide purchaser and thus not liable for the alleged offences.
- Whether the allegations under the BNSS and animal protection statutes are sufficient to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 281, 303(2), 317(5), 325, 3(5), 35(3), 482(2)
- Bihar Prevention and Improvement of Animal Act, 1955 — s. 4(B)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, 1960 — s. 11, 4
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- animal theft
- animal cruelty
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bona fide purchaser
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38847 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2026 Thana- MUFFASIL District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Md. Jamilluddin Ahmad @ Jamilluddin, Son of Md. Jalaluddin Resident of
Village Sonar Khap, P.S.- Kutumba, District - Aurangabad, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 17-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with
Muffasil P.S. Case No. 114 of 2026 registered for the offences
under Sections 281, 303(2), 317(5), 325, 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 4(B) of the Bihar Prevention and
Improvement of Animal Act, 1955 and Sections 11, 4 of the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, 1960.
3. As per the prosecution case, the patrolling party
intercepted one Tata ACE Magic vehicle and recovered four
Oxen, which were loaded in the same and two persons were also
apprehended, who disclosed his name as Md. Jamilluddin
Ahmad @ Jamilluddin (petitioner). The apprehended person on
demand does not produce any document to prove that they were
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38847 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
2/4
bona fide purchaser of the said Ox.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and from
perusal of the documents on record, it would be evident that he
was the bona fide purchaser and had purchased four Oxen on
11.03.2026 and was transporting the same when the vehicle was
intercepted. It has further been submitted that the petitioner,
during the course of the investigation, was given the benefit of
the provision of Section 35(3) of BNSS, however, the police
have subsequently submitted charge-sheet and therefore, he has
a reasonable apprehension of being arrested. It has next been
submitted that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is not made
out against the petitioner, especially for the fact that there is no
allegation of any cruelty being committed upon the animals,
which were being carried and since the petitioner has valid
documents of purchase of the said Ox, therefore, the allegation
of theft of the animal is not correct. It has lastly been submitted
that the petitioner carries clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38847 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
3/4
petitioner above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the
event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of four weeks from today, 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
Muffasil P.S. Case No. 114 of 2026, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S.
as well as subject to the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close
relative.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in
Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in
violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court
concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature
of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty
to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is
found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal
antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-
mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38847 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
4/4
in the name of verification.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is
allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.