Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Md. Rakim @ Mohammad RakimversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the stipulated bond and surety conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Rakim, feared arrest in a case registered under Section 354B of the IPC. He had previously applied for anticipatory bail, which was disposed of in February 2024, and had cooperated with the investigation, resulting in no arrest by the police. After a charge‑sheet was filed and cognizance taken, he again sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the police’s earlier decision not to arrest should preclude his detention. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering the petitioner’s clean record and cooperation, granted anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to the provisions of Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the police have not arrested the accused but cognizance has been taken.
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior cooperation and clean antecedent justify bail.
  • Whether conditions under Section 482(2) of the Cr.P.C. may be imposed on anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Section 354B IPC
  • Criminal Procedure Code
  • cognizance
  • police investigation
  • bail bond

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8055 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2023 Thana- DHAKA District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Rakim @ Mohammad Rakim S/o Md. Kazim R/o Village- Chandanbara,
                 P.S-. Dhaka, District- East Champaran

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Asif Kalim
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Surendra Prasad Singh
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   03-07-2026               1.    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Asif

                   Kalim and learned A.P.P. for the State.

                             2.    The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Section 354B of the

                   IPC.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent. It is next submitted

                   that petitioner had earlier moved before this Court seeking

                   anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc No. 4770 of 2024 and the

                   same came to be disposed of by an order dated 20-2-2024 in

                   terms of the order dated 13-2-2024 in Cr. Misc No. 3536 of

                   2024 (Naushad Ansari vs. the State of Bihar). It is further

                   submitted that in compliance of the order dated 20-2-2024 in Cr.

                   Misc No. 4770 of 2024, the petitioner was given notice under
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8055 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
                                                          2/2




                        Section 41A of the Cr.P.C and the petitioner cooperated in the

                        investigation and police never felt the need of arresting the

                        petitioner. It is also submitted that after investigation, charge-

                        sheet came to be submitted based on which cognizance has been

                        taken as such petitioner apprehends arrest. It is next submitted

                        that when police during the course of investigation did not arrest

                        the petitioner, whether it would be prudent for the court to send

                        the petitioner to jail based on an order of cognizance.

                                 4.     Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

                        anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                                 5.     Considering the submissions made by the learned

                        counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the

                        event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks

                        from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail

                        bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties

                        of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial

                        court where the case is pending/successor court in connection

                        with Dhaka P.S. Case No. 101 of 2023, subject to the conditions

                        as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

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