Nasik Nadeer vs. The State Of Bihar
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Nasik Nadeer, sought anticipatory bail in Pothia Police Station Case No. 38 of 2025, registered under various sections of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner, along with co-accused, demanded 'rangdari' (extortion money) of Rs. 5,00,000/- from the informant, who is a Munshi for Geeta Enterprises Weigh Bridge. The informant's enterprise holds a license for weighing sand-laden tractors and providing challans with GST. The petitioner is accused of forcibly loading sand onto a truck without a challan, threatening the informant with a pistol, and obstructing the weighing machine's operation for approximately six hours. The petitioner claims false implication due to political reasons, stating he is a Ward Member.
Held
The Court denied the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail. The Court found that there were specific allegations against the petitioner regarding the demand for extortion money and threatening the informant. The Court noted that the petitioner, along with his associates, forcibly loaded sand onto a truck and obstructed the functioning of the weighing machine using illegal force. Furthermore, the Court observed that the petitioner has criminal antecedents, with six criminal cases mentioned in the application for serious offences, including provisions of the Arms Act. Based on these findings, the Court was not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The ratio decidendi is that serious allegations of extortion, use of force, obstruction of public services, coupled with criminal antecedents, weigh against the grant of anticipatory bail.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in light of the allegations of extortion and obstruction of public service? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argues that he has been falsely implicated in the case due to political reasons, as he is a Ward Member of the Zila Parishad Area No. 10 Kochadhaman. The petitioner relies on his status as an elected representative to suggest a motive for false implication. Revenue/State's Contention: The State, through the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, did not explicitly present arguments beyond the FIR and the court's perusal of the materials. However, the prosecution case, as detailed in the FIR, highlights specific allegations of demand for extortion money and the use of force, including a pistol, to load sand forcibly and obstruct the weighing machine's functioning. The State implicitly relies on the gravity of these allegations and the petitioner's alleged criminal antecedents.
Sections Cited
Section 190, Section 191(2), Section 191(3), Section 308(2), Section 308(5), Section 351(2), Section 352, Section 438
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER 2 10-09-2025
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Pothia Police Station Case No. 38 of 2025, dated 14.02.2025, disclosing offences punishable under Sections 190/191(2)/191(3)/308(2)/308(5)/351(2)/352 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that the informant is the Munshi (clerk) of Geeta Enterprises Weigh Bridge and a license has been given to the informant Enterprises for weighing the tractor/vehicle loaded with sand and also to provide challan with GST to the transporters. The settlement of the sand pier in cluster 5 was also made in favour of the informant Enterprises 2/3 for five years. It has been alleged that the petitioner, along with other co-accused persons, started demanding rangdari of Rs. 5,00,000/- and threatened the informant to load the sand on the vehicle without any challan etc and they used to threatened the transporters also who used to come to the weighing machine for taking challan after weighing the sand. On 05.02.2025, in the night, the petitioner and other co-accused persons came with a truck, bearing registration no. BR 37GA/7261, near the weighing machine of the informant Enterprises and started loading sand forcibly and threatened the informant with dire consequences using pistol and abused the informant also. They also got the sand forcibly loaded on the truck, due to which the weighing machine was obstructed for about six hours.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to political reason inasmuch as the petitioner is the Ward Member of the Zila Parishad Area No. 10 Kochadhaman.
I have heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned and have gone through the materials available on record.
The specific allegation of demand of rangdari and 3/3 threatening the informant is against the petitioner, who, along with his associates, named in the First Information Report, forcibly got the sand loaded on the truck and also obstructed the functioning of the weighing machine by using illegal force. The petitioner is having criminal antecedents inasmuch as six criminal cases are mentioned in paragraph 3 of this application, for serious offences, including the provisions of the Arms Act.
Accordingly, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.
This application is, accordingly, dismissed
Prabhakar Anand/- (Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) U √ T √
Reproduced from the public record of the Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.