Patna High Court
Jamshed Ansari @ Jamshed AlamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and involvement as indicated in the case diary warranted no relief.
Summary
The petitioner, Jamshed Ansari, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a robbery case (Section 394 IPC) registered in 2022 based on an FIR filed by informant Raju Kumar. The FIR alleged that four persons, including the petitioner, attacked the informant, inflicting knife injuries and stealing his motorcycle and mobile. The petitioner argued that the FIR named unknown persons and that he had no involvement, citing his criminal antecedent as the only link. The State contended that the petitioner’s name appeared in the case diary and was identified by a co-accused, Navin Kumar, who had been arrested. The court, noting the seriousness of the offence, the petitioner’s prior similar criminal record, and the fact that the incident occurred in 2022, concluded that no relief could be granted. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the robbery case under Section 394 IPC.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 394
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- robbery
- Section 394 IPC
- criminal antecedent
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76134 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-179 Year-2022 Thana- DUMARIAGHAT District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Jamshed Ansari @ Jamshed Alam S/O Md. Makbool Ahmad @ Maqbul
Ansari R/O Vill.- Jussaini, P.S.- Dumariya Ghat, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nafisuzzoha, Advocate
: Mr. Md. Raghib Alam, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 24-02-2026 Heard Mr. Md. Raghib Alam, learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned APP representing the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Dumariyaghat P.S. Case No. 179 of 2022
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 394 of the
Indian Penal Code, lodged on 20.08.2022 by the informant Raju
Kumar.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that on 19.08.2022 as he was moving from Gopalganj to
Motihari on NH-27, four persons intercepted and tried to rob
him or the belongings. Upon his opposition, he got knife blow
on the back as also the thighs, they later took away the
motorcycle and the mobile. This led to the F.I.R..
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76134 of 2025(3) dt.24-02-2026
2/2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
F.I.R. is against unknown, he has no role to play in the matter,
only because of criminal antecedent, implicated.
5. Learned APP on the other hand opposes the prayer
submitting that his role has come in the case diary and co-
accused Navin Kumar, who was arrested, gave his name.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also
the paragraph no.3 which shows his criminal antecedent of the
same nature, the matter is of the year 2022, in that background,
no relief can be extended.
7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U T
Checking your session…