Mahafuj Kuraishi vs. The State Of Bihar

Facts

The petitioner, Mahafuj Kuraishi, seeks anticipatory bail in connection with Siwan City P.S. Case No. 631 of 2021, registered for offences under Sections 365, 364, 302, 201, 120(B), and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The informant's son, Vishal, along with two others, disappeared while travelling in a Scorpio vehicle. The Scorpio was later found unclaimed. During the investigation, it emerged that Vishal and his friends were involved in extortion activities and allegedly planned to eliminate a criminal named Ayub Khan. Ayub Khan, upon learning of this plan, allegedly conspired to eliminate Vishal and his friends. The petitioner is implicated with an allegation that he was present at Bibi ka Bangra on November 7, 2021, when Vishal and his friends were brought there, and subsequently killed. The petitioner claims to be a businessman and a GST payee, asserting false implication.

Held

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, Mahafuj Kuraishi. The Court considered the submissions made by the petitioner's counsel, including his clean antecedents and his assertion of being a businessman and GST payee. While acknowledging the serious nature of the charges, the Court found merit in the petitioner's argument that his implication was based on suspicion and that his alleged presence at Bibi ka Bangra did not conclusively establish his involvement in the actual killing. The Court noted the petitioner's assurance to cooperate with the investigation. The operative direction was to release the petitioner on anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court. The Court also stipulated that if the petitioner fails to cooperate with the investigation, the trial court would be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds. No specific issue was left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner's apprehension of arrest is justified given the allegations against him, particularly concerning his alleged presence at Bibi ka Bangra on November 7, 2021, in connection with the disappearance and subsequent murder of Vishal and his friends? (Mixed question of law and fact, relating to Sections 302, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code). Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contends he has clean antecedents and has been falsely implicated. He argues that his name surfaced during the investigation without any clear connection to the alleged conspiracy or the commission of the murder. He emphasizes his status as a businessman and GST payee, suggesting it is improbable he would engage in such activities that would bring disrepute to his business. He submits that the allegations hinge on suspicion and that his presence at Bibi ka Bangra, where the occurrence of killing allegedly did not take place, is insufficient to implicate him in the murder. He assures cooperation with the investigation. Revenue/State's Arguments: The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.