Md. Salimuddin @ Md. Salimuddin Ansari vs The State Of Bihar on 24 July, 2026

    0
    6
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Patna High Court – Orders

    Md. Salimuddin @ Md. Salimuddin Ansari vs The State Of Bihar on 24 July, 2026

    Author: Rajiv Roy

    Bench: Rajiv Roy

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24018 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1161 Year-2024 Thana- BUXAR COMPLAINT CASE District-
                                                              Buxar
                     ======================================================
                     Md. Salimuddin @ Md. Salimuddin Ansari S/o Late Naimuddin Ansari R/o
                     Village - Balihar, P.S - Simari, District - Buxar, Bihar
    
                                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
               1.    The State of Bihar
               2.    Md. Sarajuddin S/o Riyajuddin Ansari R/o Village - Balihar, P.S - Simari,
                     District - Buxar, Bihar
    
                                                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
                     ======================================================
                     Appearance :
                     For the Petitioner/s     :     Mrs. Jyoti Prasad, Advocate
                     For the Opposite Party/s :     Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP
                     ======================================================
                     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                                           ORAL ORDER
    
    4   24-07-2026

    Heard Mrs. Jyoti Prasad, learned counsel for the

    petitioner and Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh for the State.

    SPONSORED

    2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in

    connection with Complaint Case No. 1161 of 2024 for the

    offence under sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506, 323 of

    the I.P.C corresponding under sections 318(4), 338, 336(3),

    430(2), 352, 351(2), 115(2) of the B.N.S. by the complainant,

    Sarajuddin.

    3. As per the complainant, the petitioner visited his

    place in the year 2013 and was informed that he has been

    appointed as an agent of Vigyor Gold Limited and assured of

    substantial profit if amount is deposited.
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24018 of 2026(4) dt.24-07-2026
    2/4

    4. Accepting his version Rs. 5,75,000/- was deposited

    but no payment made and when their complain reached the

    house of the accused in March, 2018, he was abused.

    5. A legal notice was sent which followed the present

    complaint in which cognizance has been taken under section

    318 (4) and 316 of the B.N.S.

    6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he

    himself is a victim of of the circumstance. Being an unemployed

    person, he trusted the finance company and was accordingly

    appointed as an agent. He himself invested a substantial amount

    of his/family members and felt cheated when they disappeared

    around 2016-17. He himself has preferred complaint vide

    complaint no. 133 (C) of 2017 long after that in the year 2014,

    the present case.

    7. He is vigorously pursuing the matter on his behalf

    as also on behalf of the local villagers who trusted him and is

    taking all possible steps to see to it that the amount comes to

    them. Last submission is that the petitioner do not have any

    criminal antecedent.

    8. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that

    giving false promise, the money was taken but the petitioner

    failed to return the same.

    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24018 of 2026(4) dt.24-07-2026
    3/4

    9. Taking into account the submissions aforesaid, as

    also that petitioner himself filed complaint in the year 2017, he

    do not have any criminal antecedent, in that background, this

    Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail

    with conditions.

    10. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event

    of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the

    receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-

    (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the

    satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Buxar in

    connection with Complaint Case No. 1161 of 2024 subject to

    the following conditions:

    (i) one of the bailor should be the family

    member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official

    document (Aadhaar Card/Voter ID Card/Pan Card/Driving

    License) to show his/her bona fide;

    (ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date

    before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive

    dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his

    bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

    (iii) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or

    promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24018 of 2026(4) dt.24-07-2026
    4/4

    failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for

    cancellation of the bail bonds;

    (iv) the petitioner shall desist from committing any

    criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty

    to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.

    11. Before parting, this Court would like to put on

    records its word of appreciation for Mrs. Jyoti Prasad for the

    proper assistance rendered in the matter.

    (Rajiv Roy, J)
    Sanny/-

    U         T
     



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here