Md Ajmal Ansari vs The State Of Bihar on 10 March, 2026

    0
    42
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Patna High Court – Orders

    Md Ajmal Ansari vs The State Of Bihar on 10 March, 2026

    Author: Satyavrat Verma

    Bench: Satyavrat Verma

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86399 of 2025
                           Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2022 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Jamui
                     ======================================================
                     Md Ajmal Ansari S/O Hasanu Miyan Resident of Vill.- Islamnagar,
                     Sitamadih, P.S.- Garhi, Distt.- Jamui
    
                                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                            Versus
               1.    The State Of Bihar
               2.    Rabiya Khatoon W/O Md Ajmal Ansari Resident of Vill.- Islamnagar,
                     (Sitamadih,) P.O.- Islamnagar, P.S.- Garhi, Distt.- Jamui
    
                                                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
                     ======================================================
                     Appearance :
                     For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Rajesh Kumar Sinha
                     For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Lalan Kumar
                     ======================================================
                     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                           ORAL ORDER
    
    3   10-03-2026

    1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

    learned APP for the State.

    SPONSORED

    2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his

    arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under

    Sections 341, 323, 379, 498A, 494/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

    3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

    the case was taken up on 08.01.2026, when notices were issued

    on opposite party no.2. It is next submitted that from perusal of

    the office report dated 23.02.2026, it would manifest that the

    same records that the ordinary notice has been received by the

    daughter of the opposite party no.2.

    4. Since notice has been received by the daughter of
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86399 of 2025(3) dt.10-03-2026
    2/3

    the opposite party no.2, hence it is deemed to be validly served.

    5. It is next submitted that petitioner, being husband,

    has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant.

    It is further submitted that the informant along with the children

    are still living in the same house where the petitioner resides. It

    is also submitted that petitioner is bearing the expense of the

    opposite party no.2 and his three children whether it be

    educational expense or expense relating to their livelihood. It is

    also submitted that specific pleading to that effect has been

    made at Para-12 of the anticipatory bail application. It is next

    submitted that at Para-11, specific pleading has been made

    denying the allegation of second marriage. It is also submitted

    that since the opposite party no.2 is staying in the same house

    where the petitioner resides and petitioner is taking care of

    opposite party no.2 and the children, as such, the opposite party

    no.2 even after receiving notice chooses not to appear and

    contest.

    6. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail

    application and submits that though a specific pleading has been

    made that opposite party no.2 along with the children are

    staying in the same house where the petitioner resides and

    petitioner is taking care of their financial needs including
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86399 of 2025(3) dt.10-03-2026
    3/3

    education and livelihood, but then, the said pleading may be

    ploy, on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

    petitioner submits that he has instruction to make submission

    that in the event, if it is found what has been pleaded at Para-12

    is incorrect i.e. petitioner is not providing financial, educational

    help to the opposite party no.2 and the children, in that event,

    the opposite party no.2 shall be free to file an application before

    this Court seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail application,

    if granted.

    7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,

    the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or

    surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six

    weeks, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-

    bonds in the sum 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 Jamui Mahila P. S. Case No.67 of 2022, subject

    to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

    8. The application stands allowed.

    (Satyavrat Verma, J)
    vikash/-

    U          T
     



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here