Patna High Court
Maqsood Ali @ Maqsood AhmadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court rejected the petitioner's second anticipatory bail application.
Summary
Maqsood Ali, alleged to have defrauded a woman of Rs.24.5 lakh and cash, was charged under IPC sections 420, 406 and 34. He sought anticipatory bail under Section 41A of the CrPC after a non‑bailable warrant was issued, although no charge‑sheet had been filed. An earlier anticipatory bail application (Cr. Misc. No.14418 of 2025) was withdrawn by the Court with liberty to file a fresh petition, which he subsequently did. The petitioner had received notice under Section 41A but failed to appear before the investigating officer. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s non‑appearance. The Court, after considering the submissions, declined to entertain the second anticipatory bail application and rejected the prayer, thereby dismissing the petition.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the petitioner has failed to appear after notice under Section 41A CrPC
- Whether a second anticipatory bail application can be entertained after a prior application was withdrawn
- Whether the absence of a charge‑sheet and the issuance of a non‑bailable warrant preclude anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 41A
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 406, 420
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 41A CrPC
- fraud
- IPC 420
- IPC 406
- non‑bailable warrant
- bail rejection
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6799 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2024 Thana- GANDHIMAIDAN District- Patna
======================================================
Maqsood Ali @ Maqsood Ahmad S/O Samiullah R/o - Katalpur, P.S -
Baikunthpur, District - Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pushpendra Priyedarshi
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bharat Bhushan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 30-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 420, 406 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of two cases and the informant
alleges that she came to know that Saied Hussain and Sahnaj
Hussain about eight years back and they requested for financial
assistance showing a tender of ICICI Bank for Rs.60 Lacs, but
informant refused as she was not having the requisite sum,
hence they gave a proposal to invest half the amount and
assured returns, thus she deposited an amount of Rs.24,50,000/-
in the account of Saied Husssain and Sahnaj from her account
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6799 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026
2/3
and gave Rs.5,50,000/- in cash, but the accused persons did not
return the amount rather gave a cheque which on presentation
for encashment bounced. It is next submitted that thereafter the
informant started enquiring when she came to know that
accused persons are fraud as real name of Saied and Sahnaj is
Mumtaz and Sanchita Banerji and Saied Hussain, who had
introduced his brother by the name Mumtaz his real name is
Maqsood Ali i.e. petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner had earlier moved this Court seeking anticipatory bail
by filing Cr. Misc. No.14418 of 2025, but then the same was
permitted to be withdrawn by an order dated 13.05.2025 with
liberty to file a fresh as it was submitted by the learned A.P.P.
after perusing the case diary that notice under Section 41(A)
Cr.P.C. has been given to the petitioner. The learned counsel for
the petitioner submits that in terms of the aforesaid liberty the
instant second anticipatory bail application has been filed.
5. On query of the Court as to whether charge-sheet
has been submitted or not, on which it is fairly submitted that
charge-sheet has not been submitted, but then non-bailable
warrant of arrest has been issued on which learned A.P.P. Sri
Chandra Bhushan Prasad after perusing the order impugned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6799 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026
3/3
submits that petitioner was given notice under Section 41(A)
Cr.P.C., but then he did not appear before the investigating
Officer. It is also submitted that whether Saied Hussain is
Mumtaz or Mumta is Maqsood Ali, the same requires to be
investigated. It is further submitted that this perhaps explains
why the petitioner despite receiving notice under Section 41(A)
Cr.P.C. did not to appear and cooperated in the investigation.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to entertain the second
anticipatory bail application.
7. The prayer of the petitioner for second anticipatory
bail stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…