Patna High Court
Khushbun Nesha @ Khushbu NeshaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The High Court held that there was no reason to interfere with the provisional anticipatory bail granted pending the filing of a charge‑sheet and therefore disposed of the application for cancellation.
Summary
The petitioner, Khushbun Nesha, filed an application seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the opposite party No.2, Faiyaz Sah, by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate on 16‑06‑2025. The petitioner argued that the case should be recorded under Section 364 IPC rather than Section 365 IPC, that the accused was involved in four other cases, and that the victim remained traceless with no charge‑sheet filed. The High Court examined the provisional nature of the bail, which was conditioned only until the charge‑sheet is filed, and noted that the investigating officer had not yet concluded the investigation. Finding no ground to interfere with the magistrate’s order, the Court directed the SHO to complete the investigation and indicated that a final decision on confirming or revoking the bail would be taken after the charge‑sheet is filed. Consequently, the application for cancellation was disposed of without altering the bail order.
Issues considered
- Whether the anticipatory bail granted to the opposite party No.2 should be cancelled on the ground that the offence is under Section 364 IPC instead of Section 365 IPC.
- Whether the provisional bail granted pending submission of a charge‑sheet can be interfered with by the High Court.
- Whether the absence of a charge‑sheet and the traceless victim affect the validity of the provisional bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 364, 365
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- provisional bail
- Section 364 IPC
- Section 365 IPC
- charge‑sheet
- investigation
- victim traceless
- High Court
- cancellation of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79014 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-729 Year-2023 Thana- BAGHA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Khushbun Nesha @ Khushbu Nesha Wife of Naushad Ansari @ Lakdu
Resident of Village - Kolhua, Police Station - Chautarwa, District - West
Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Faiyaz Sah Son of Nurain Sah Resident of Village - Kolhua, Police Station -
Chautarwa, District - West Champaran
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shahbaj Alam
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Fahimuddin
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The present application has been filed for
cancellation of anticipatory bail granted by the learned court of
Incharge Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-1st Bagaha, West
Champaran dated 16.06.2025 passed in Bagaha (Patkhauli) P.S.
Case No. 729 of 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that despite the fact that the specific suspicion has been raised
against the opposite party no. 2, making his case stand on a
different footing from the other accused persons of this case
coupled with the fact that the SHO Patkhauli had already filed
an application dated 21.12.2024 before the Magistrate
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79014 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026
2/3
concerned indicating that the provision has been converted from
one under Section 365 to 364 of the Indian Penal Code, the
learned court concerned has not taken these facts into
consideration and has rather wrongly recorded the present case
to be one under Section 365 of the IPC. It has also been
submitted that the bail has been granted despite the petitioner
being an accused in four other criminal cases and the victim is
still traceless coupled with the fact that the charge-sheet has also
not been submitted as yet against the opposite party no. 2.
4. Upon perusal of the order dated 16.06.2025
granting bail to the opposite party no. 2, it is found that the
opposite party no. 2 has been granted provisional bail till
submission of charge-sheet with the condition that the bailors
would be co-villagers.
5. Considering such fact that the provisional bail has
been granted only till submission of the charge-sheet, this Court
finds no reason to interfere with the order dated 16.06.2025
whereby the provisional bail has been granted to the opposite
party no. 2. However, SHO and the Investigating Officer is
directed to conclude the investigation making it reach to its
logical end and once the charge-sheet is filed before the court
concerned, the learned Court would pass an order in accordance
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79014 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026
3/3
with law as to whether the provisional bail granted to the
opposite party no. 2 is fit to be confirmed or rejected and in such
consideration the factum of the victim being traceless, would
also be a relevant factor.
6. With such observations, the present application is
disposed of.
7. A copy of this order be communicated to S.H.O/
Investigating Officer of Bagaha (Pathkauli) P.S. for necessary
action.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
devendra/-
U T
Checking your session…