Patna High Court
Syed Wahid WarsiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to bond and cooperation conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Syed Wahid Warsi, a licensee of a cash service point (CSP), was implicated in a FIR alleging offences under Sections 316(2), 316(5), 318(4), 338, 336(3) and 61(2) of the B.N.S., 2023, based on a complaint that a customer’s money was misappropriated by an employee, Yogendra, who later confessed. The petitioner argued that the allegations were directed at Yogendra, who had admitted guilt, and that his involvement was merely as the CSP licence holder, not as a participant in the fraud. The State opposed anticipatory bail, contending that Yogendra’s confession implicated the petitioner and that bail might enable him to abscond or tamper with evidence. The Court considered the merits of the anticipatory bail application, the lack of direct evidence against the petitioner, and the need to balance the investigation’s integrity with the petitioner’s liberty. It granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties and conditions that the petitioner cooperate with the investigation, and allowed the trial court to cancel the bail if non‑cooperation is shown.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the FIR and Yogendra’s confessional statement.
- Whether the petitioner’s role as licence holder makes him liable for the alleged offences.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 316(2), 316(5), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 61(2)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- misappropriation of funds
- CSP licence
- Section 316
- Section 318
- Section 338
- Section 336
- Section 61
- Section 482
- bail conditions
- Indian criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4674 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-657 Year-2025 Thana- AURANGABAD TOWN District-
Aurangabad
======================================================
Syed Wahid Warsi Son of Haji Nezamuddinn Warsi Resident of Mohalla -
Pathan Toli, Police Station - Aurangabad Town, District - Aurangabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Adil Abbas
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 23-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2),
316(5), 318(4), 338, 336(3) and 61(2) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. The Investigating Officer of the case, in compliance
of the order dated 16.03.2026 is present in the Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges
that she is an illiterate lady and her sons were outside Bihar and
she has opened an account with SBI and deposited an amount of
Rs.95,000/- received from Jiwika over a prolonged period of
time from CSP of Yogendra and petitioner, further when she
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4674 of 2026(3) dt.23-03-2026
2/4
enquired from the Bank about her balance, she was informed
that there is no money in the account, thus she showed receipt
issued by the CSP to the Bank, on which, she was informed that
receipts are forged, thus she confronted Yogendra, on which,
Yogendra accepted that he has cheated and later closed the CSP
and fled, further he has cheated other customers also.
5. Learned counsel submits that petitioner has been
falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next
submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the
FIR, it would manifest that thrust of the allegation is against
Yogendra. It is next submitted that petitioner was given license
to run the CSP and he appointed Yogendra to manage the CSP
and the thrust of the allegation in the instant FIR is also against
Yogendra, as informant alleges that she used to give money to
Yogendra for crediting in her account, but then Yogendra instead
of crediting the money in her account, misappropriated it and
when he was caught, he accepted his guilt, it is thus submitted
that merely because the license of the CSP is in name of the
petitioner that in itself should not be a justification for sending
the petitioner to jail when he is not involved in the occurrence
and Yogendra has accepted his guilt.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4674 of 2026(3) dt.23-03-2026
3/4
anticipatory bail of the petitioner based on instruction of the
Investigating Officer. It is submitted that Yogendra was arrested
and he in his confessional statement stated that he
misappropriated the amount at the behest of the petitioner, on
which, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submits that confession in police custody does not have any
evidentiary value. It is also submitted that it is not alleged by the
informant that she gave money to Yogendra at the behest of the
petitioner. At this stage, the learned APP submits that if
privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the
petitioner may abscond or try to tamper with the evidence, on
which, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submits that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in
the investigation to prove his innocence.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the
petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where
the case is pending/successor court in connection with Town
P.S. Case No.657/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4674 of 2026(3) dt.23-03-2026
4/4
under Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
8. However, it is made clear that in the event if the
Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the
learned trial court bringing to its notice that the petitioner
despite giving assurance to this court is not co-operating in the
investigation in that event the learned trial court shall be at
liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
9. The personal appearance of the Investigating
Officer is dispensed with.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…