Patna High Court
Md. Saddam @ SabbuversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to specified monetary and procedural conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Saddam, was implicated in a fraud case (Sultanganj P.S. Case No. 177 of 2024) involving alleged cheating and intimidation under IPC sections 420, 406, 506 and 34. He offered to pay a total restitution of Rs. 5,00,000, proposing Rs. 2,50,000 on surrender and the balance within six weeks. The State opposed his anticipatory bail application, while the petitioner’s counsel sought bail on the basis of the proposed payment. The High Court, considering the parties’ positions, directed that the trial court accept a bail bond on surrender and granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs. 10,000 bail bond, two sureties, payment of Rs. 2,50,000 by demand draft, and several conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The order also imposed strict compliance requirements, including regular court appearances and prohibition on tampering with witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of fraud under IPC sections 420, 406, 506 and 34.
- Whether the court can condition anticipatory bail on payment of restitution and other undertakings.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 406, 420, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- fraud
- IPC 420
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- bail conditions
- restitution
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84009 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-177 Year-2024 Thana- SULTANGANJ District- Patna
======================================================
Md. Saddam @ Sabbu S/o Late Md. Firoz R/o Mohalla- Sahaganj, Near
Chauraha, Ps- Sultanganj, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.N.K.Agarwal
Mr.Danish Raja
Md.Tipu Sultan
Mr.M.K.Thakur
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Vinod Shanker Modi
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 11-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Sultanganj P.S. Case No. 177 of 2024, F.I.R
dated 03.05.2024 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 420, 406, 506 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. According to prosecution case, the FIR was lodged
by Yashmin Salma before S.H.O., Sultanganj, alleging that in
2023 she contacted Md. Saddam @ Sabbu and S.M. Afsar, who
introduced themselves as property dealers and showed her a
three-storey house allegedly owned by Salma Khatoon. A deal
for Rs. 65 lakhs was finalized, and she paid Rs. 30 lakhs as
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84009 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
2/4
earnest money Rs. 20 lakhs in cash and Rs. 10 lakhs through
bearer cheques. Later, the accused avoided registration, and she
discovered that the alleged owner was a fake person with forged
documents. When she demanded her money back, the accused
threatened her and her family, revealing a planned fraud.
4. At the outset, Senior Counsel, Sri N.K.Agarwal,
who appears for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is
ready to pay that the amount to the tune of Rs. 5,00,000/- for
which, the liability upon this petitioner is fastend and the
petitioner proposes to pay Rs. 2,50,000/- on the date of
surrender and the rest amount to the tune of Rs. 2,50,000/-
would be paid in an interval of six weeks. On the basis of the
stand so taken, prayer is made that petitioner may be allowed
the privilege of anticipatory bail. On the other hand, informant
is represented through Sri Mukesh Kumar Thakur submits that
if the petitioner is ready discharge his liability then appropriate
order may be passed in this regard.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail application.
6. Considering the stand taken by the parties, this
Court is of the view that the learned Trial Court would accept
the bail bond of this petitioner on surrender, being made within
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84009 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
3/4
the period of three weeks from today subject to payment of Rs.
2,50,000/- through Demand Draft prepared in the name of the
informant and another amount, which shall be paid within a
further period of six weeks from the date of surrender subject to
such undertaking being given by the petitioner. In view of the
stand so taken, this Court is inclined to grant the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of
his/her arrest or surrender before the Court below within a
period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned S.D.J,M, Patna in connection with
Sultanganj P.S. Case No. 177 of 2024, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita and with other following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailors should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every
date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84009 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
4/4
consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
abhishekkr/-
U T
Checking your session…