Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Rabban AliversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to specified bond and surety conditions.

Summary

Rabban Ali, a former Panchayat Secretary, was charged under Sections 316(5), 318(4), 337 and 336(3) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act for allegedly misappropriating Rs.2,53,623. The prosecution alleged that he and another individual diverted the amount while in office. The petitioner contended that he is innocent, that the alleged loss was later deposited by the ward member’s wife, and that no misappropriation occurred during his tenure. He also highlighted his clean antecedent and that the issue was raised only after his transfer. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted bail on the condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, imposing several compliance conditions, and ordered the application allowed.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner pending trial for offences under Sections 316(5), 318(4), 337 and 336(3) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act
  • Whether the petitioner poses a flight risk or threat to the investigation

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • misappropriation
  • Panchayat Secretary
  • Criminal Procedure Code
  • Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act
  • high court

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72477 of 2025
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2025 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Rabban Ali Son of Dr Salim @ Salimuddin @ Salim R/o Village- Senwariya,
                 P.S.- Tujrkauliya, District- East Champaran, Motihari

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Shailendra Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   08-01-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 46 of 2025 dated 29.01.2025

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 316(5),

                   318(4), 337 and 336(3) of the B.N.S.

                                3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and one

                   another has misappropriated of sum of Rs. 2,53, 623/- when

                   they were posted as Panchayat Secretary.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this

                   case and no misappropriation has been done during his tenure. It

                   has next been submitted that while the petitioner was posted as

                   Panchayat Secretary, the said issue was never raised and only
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72477 of 2025(3) dt.08-01-2026
                                            2/3




          when he was transferred, the issue of misappropriation was

          raised and the F.I.R. was lodged. Learned counsel has drawn the

          attention towards Annexure-P/2 whereby it would be evident

          that the ward member’s wife namely, Mophida Begam deposited

          so called defalcated amount of Rs. 2,53,623/-. It has next been

          submitted that as on date, there is no misappropriation of any

          amount though the same had been deposited within the tenure

          when the petitioner was in custody. It has lastly been submitted

          that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he is in custody

          since 25.05.2025.

                        5. Learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer

          for bail of the petitioner.

                        6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

          case, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail 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

          learned Court concerned, Motihari, East Champaran in

          connection with Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 46 of 2025, subject to

          the following terms and conditions :-

                        (i) One of the bailors shall be a close relative of the

          petitioner.

                        (ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72477 of 2025(3) dt.08-01-2026
                                                       3/3




                     before the concerned Court on each and every date of the trial

                     and shall cooperate in the investigation.

                                  (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) The trial court shall verify the criminal antecedent

                     of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is found that the

                     petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the trial court

                     shall take necessary steps for cancellation of bail bond of the

                     petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the

                     above mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or 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.

                                  8. The application stands allowed.



                                              (Sourendra Pandey, J)
Gautam/-

U     T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

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