Patna High Court
Md. Jafer Imam @ Md. Shamim @ Jafar ImamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail should be granted, subject to conditions, as the prosecution evidence was insufficient and the petitioner had no criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Jafer Imam, sought anticipatory bail in connection with a criminal case (Rajgir P.S. Case No. 329 of 2022) alleging offences under Sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code, based on an informant’s claim that the petitioner received Rs. 16.5 lakh. The petitioner contended that the allegation was false, the informant failed to produce any documentary proof such as a passbook or account details, and that he had no prior criminal record. The State opposed the bail, arguing that the charges were serious. The High Court, after noting the lack of substantive evidence and the petitioner’s clean antecedent, directed that anticipatory bail be granted upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482 of the CrPC. The order also stipulated compliance with attendance requirements and verification of criminal antecedent, and clarified that any observations in the order would not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving alleged cheating and criminal breach of trust under Sections 420 and 406 IPC.
- Whether the prosecution’s evidence is sufficient to deny bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of criminal antecedent warrants the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 420
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- cheating
- criminal breach of trust
- IPC
- CrPC
- bail conditions
- high court
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54009 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-329 Year-2022 Thana- RAJGIR District- Nalanda
======================================================
Md. Jafer Imam @ Md. Shamim @ Jafar Imam Son of Javarul Hassain
village- Muslim Tola Jhirkaiya Po- Gomiyan Ps- Gomiyan, Ps- Kathara Op,
Dist- Bokaro (Jharkhand)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sanjay Dusadh son of Late Ramsawrup Dusadh village- Hasanpur, ps-
Rajgir, Dist- Nalanda
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar Yadav, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umesh Lal Verma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State. Despite valid service of notice nobody
appears on behalf of O.P. No. 2.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest
in connection with Rajgir P.S. Case No. 329 of 2022 instituted
for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 406 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case is to the effect that the
informant has stated that he had given total of Rs. 16.5 lakhs to
the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated and the claim of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54009 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
informant is all false and concocted. The said fact is supported
from perusal of the case diary wherein in paragraph-71, the I.O.
of the case had been asking the informant to submit the
document whereby the money was transferred to the petitioner.
Despite notice sent to the informant, the informant did not turn
up along with the passbook or Khata number or otherwise to
show that the amounts were actually transferred in the account
of the petitioner. It has been submitted that no case under
Sections 406 and 420 of the IPC is made out. Lastly, it has been
submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts aforesaid, the petitioner is
directed to be released on bail, in the event of his 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, on
his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned District and Additional Sessions
Judge-cum-Special Judge 1st, Biharsharif, Nalanda in connection
with Rajgir P.S. Case No. 329 of 2022, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 482 of the BNSS and subject to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54009 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the
petitioner;
(ii) the petitioner will remain present on each and
every date fixed by the Court below, if so required by the
learned Trial Court;
(iii) in case of absence on two consecutive dates or in
violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bonds of the petitioner
will liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned;
(iv) the 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 bonds of the
petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the
above mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of the
same on in the name of verification.
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
krishna/-
U T
Checking your session…