Patna High Court
Mohammad Ansari @ BhuttuversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
Holding
In the absence of direct evidence and with no risk of flight or tampering, the petitioners are entitled to bail.
Summary
Petitioners Mohammad Ansari and Imam Ansari applied for bail in a case registered under IPC sections 363 read with 34, and later 201, 302, 120B, alleging kidnapping and murder. The FIR did not name them, and they argued false implication and lack of criminal history. The prosecution opposed bail but did not dispute the petitioners' contentions. The court observed that no direct evidence linked the petitioners, that similarly situated co‑accused had already been released on bail, and that there was no risk of flight, witness tampering, or misuse of liberty. Considering these factors, the court granted bail with a bond of Rs. 25,000 and standard conditions, emphasizing that the order does not prejudice the trial's merits.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to co‑accused not named in the FIR in a serious offence under IPC sections 363, 34, 201, 302, 120B
- Whether the absence of direct evidence and similarity to other co‑accused released on bail warrants bail
- Whether there is any risk of flight, witness tampering, or misuse of liberty that would justify denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 201, 302, 34, 363
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- kidnapping
- murder
- criminal procedure
- presumption of innocence
- trial
- sureties
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91258 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-49 Year-2024 Thana- HUSSAINGANJ District- Siwan
======================================================
1. Mohammad Ansari @ Bhuttu S/o Mohammad Tahir Ansari Resident Of
Village- Bindwal, Ps- Hussainganj, Dist- Siwan
2. Imam Ansari @ Sagun @ Imam Hussain S/o Mohammad Tahir Ansari
Resident Of Village- Bindwal, Ps- Hussainganj, Dist- Siwan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Shahi, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 1.By means of this bail application, petitioners, who
are involved in connection with Hussainganj P.S Case no. 49 of
2024 registered for the offences under Section 363 read with
Section 34 of I.P.C to which Sections 201, 302, 120(B) of I.P.C
were added subsequently, seek enlargement on bail during the
pendency of trial.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State.
3. The brief facts of the case which are required to be
stated are that Anwar Ali who is father of the deceased gave an
information to the police on 23.02.2024 stating inter alia that on
22.02.2024 at about 07.30 P.M., co-accused, Bullet Ansari @
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91258 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/6
Ahsanul Haque asked his son on phone to come to his house.
Thereafter, his son went to the house of co-accused Bullet
Ansari @ Ahsanul Haque. At about 8.00 P.M., when he called
on his son’s mobile, then he informed that he is at the house of
co-accused Bullet Ansari @ Ahsanul Haque. At about 2.00
A.M., he again made a call on his son’s phone but it was
switched off. Hence he believed that his son has been kidnapped
by Bullet Ansari @ Ahsanul Haque. FIR also alleges that when
informant’s wife went to attend call of nature in the night, she
saw in the torch light that her son was going with Bullet Ansari
@ Ahsanul Haque and Saiyad Ansari.
4.It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that
petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in
this case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the
petitioners are not named in the FIR. After five days of
registration of FIR, complainant moved another application
dated 28.03.2024 stating inter alia that in the said incident four
other persons were also involved, whose name later on surfaced
as Abdul Majid, Ahmed Raqza and petitioners namely
Mohammad Ansari @ Bhuttu and Imam Ansari @ Sagun. It is
also pointed out that co-accused Abdul Majid, Ahmed Raqza
and Saiyad Ansari have been granted bail by a coordinate Bench
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91258 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/6
of this Court vide orders dated 13.11.2025, 28.11.2025 and
01.12.2025 respectively, hence the petitioners are also entitled to
be released on bail. The petitioners have no criminal history.
Averments in this regard have been mentioned in paragraph no.
3 of the bail application. Several other submissions in order to
demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the
petitioners have also been placed forth before the Court. Lastly,
it is submitted that petitioners are languishing in jail since
26.08.2025. In case they are released on bail, they will not
misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate with the trial.
5.Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners reiterating
the prosecution case as mentioned in F.I.R. but he does not
dispute the averments made in bail application and the
submission made at the bar on behalf of the petitioners.
6.Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the
parties and perused the record, I find that petitioners are not
named in the FIR. There is no direct evidence against them and
identically situated co-accused Abdul Majid and Ahmed Raqza
have been granted bail as noted above. The named accused
Saiyad Ansari has also been released on bail. The investigation
has been completed and charge-sheet has been submitted against
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91258 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/6
the petitioners. Now there is no possibility of tampering the
witnesses. Due to heavy docket of the cases, the possibility of
conclusion of trial of the petitioners in near future is very bleak.
There is no chance of the petitioners, of fleeing away from the
judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. As
on date there is no material on record to presume that there is
danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail to
the petitioners.
7.In view of the above, without entering into merit of the
case, keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence,
severity of punishment, complicity of the petitioners,
submissions of the learned counsel for the parties made at the
bar and reasons as noted above, this Court is of the opinion that
the petitioners are liable to be released on bail.
8.Accordingly, the bail application of the petitioners
stands allowed.
9.Let the petitioners namely Mohammad Ansari @ Bhuttu
and Imam Ansari @ Sagun @ Imam Hussain be released on bail
in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with two sureties in
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court concerned
with the following conditions that :-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91258 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
5/6
(i) the petitioners shall cooperate with the expeditious
disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the Court unless
inevitable. Two consecutive default in putting appearance shall
lead to an action towards cancellation of the bail bond of the
petitioners.
(ii) the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make
any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted
with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing
such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with
the evidence.
(iii) the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly involve
in any criminal activity after being released on bail.
(iv) in case, at any stage it is found the petitioners have
concealed their criminal history before this Court, learned Court
below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners after hearing
them and getting satisfied that the petitioners have concealed
criminal antecedents despite their knowledge of the same.
(v) in case, it is brought to the notice of the Court below
that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, learned
Court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.
10. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited
to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91258 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
6/6
in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the
case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its
independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected
by anything said in this order.
11.The trial Court shall make an endeavour to conclude
the trial of the petitioners expeditiously without granting
unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.
(Sanjay Kumar Singh , J)
Prakash/-
U
Checking your session…