Sahanawaj Miya @ Shahnaj AnsariversusThe State of Bihar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.604 of 2026
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2021 Thana- ADHAOURA District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
                 ======================================================
                 Sahanawaj Miya @ Shahnaj Ansari S/O Islam Ansari Resident of village-
                 Bhagwanpur, P.S.- Bhagwanpur, District- Kaimur at Bhabua

                                                                                 ... ... Appellant/s
                                                      Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Gulab Paswan S/O Late Somaru Paswan Resident of village- Todi, P.S.-
                 Bhagwanpur, District- Kaimur at Bhabua

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s    :        Mr. Rajani Kant Pandey, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s   :        Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl.PP
                 For the Informant      :        Mr. Jay Prakash Singh, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   14-05-2026                   Heard Mr. Rajani Kant Pandey, learned counsel for

                   the appellant, Mr. Jay Prakash Singh, learned counsel appearing

                   on behalf of the Respondent No. 2 as well as Mr. Sadanand

                   Paswan, learned Spl.P.P. for the State.

                               2. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) against

                   refusal of the prayer for regular bail by order dated 21.01.2026

                   passed by the learned Court of Additional Sessions Judge-1st,

                   Special Judge, (SC/ST), Kaimur at Bhabua in connection with

                   Adhaura P.S. Case No. 60/2021 F.I.R. dated 17.12.2021

                   registered under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and

                   Section 27 of the Arms Act. Later on cognizance has been taken

                   under Section 302, 34, 120B, 201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.604 of 2026(4) dt.14-05-2026
                                             2/4




          Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled

          Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

                       3. According to the prosecution case, it is stated by

          the informant that his son who left the house on 16.12.2021

          after taking food did not return. On 17.12.2021, at 3 a.m., he

          was informed by one Shahnawaz Mian that Murari Singh called

          him to inform that some people were shooting him. The

          informant started to search. He met Murari Singh and thereafter

          the dead body of the informant’s son was recovered.

                       4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

          appellant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the

          present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in

          the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the appellant has not

          committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. The appellant is

          not named in the FIR. The name of the appellant has come in

          the present case on the basis of suspicion raised by the

          informant that the co-accused, namely, Murari Singh and the

          appellant has killed his son. There is no eye witness of the

          alleged occurrence and except the suspicion nothing has come

          during investigation which suggests the involvement of the

          appellant in the present occurrence. Charge has been framed

          against the appellant on 16.03.2026. Similarly situated co-
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.604 of 2026(4) dt.14-05-2026
                                             3/4




          accused person, namely, Murari Singh has been granted regular

          bail by the co-ordinate bench of this Hon’ble Court vide order

          dated 17.01.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 27585/2022. The

          appellant is in custody since 15.12.2025.

                       5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          Respondent No. 2 as well as learned Special Public Prosecutor

          for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the

          appellant on the ground that appellant carries five criminal

          antecedents other than the present one but fairly submits that out

          of five case he is on bail in four cases and he is acquitted in one

          case.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts that appellant is not

          named in the FIR, the name of the petitioner has come during

          investigation and similarly situated co-accused person has been

          granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this Hon’ble Court and

          charge has been framed against the petitioner, let the appellant,

          above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.

          10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

          each to the satisfaction of learned Court of Additional Sessions

          Judge-1st, Special Judge, (SC/ST), Kaimur at Bhabua in

          connection with Adhaura P.S. Case No. 60/2021, with other

          following conditions:-
             Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.604 of 2026(4) dt.14-05-2026
                                                          4/4




                                    i. Appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

                       properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court

                       and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and

                       on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

                       reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                                    ii. If the appellant tampers with the evidence or the

                       witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move

                       for cancellation of bail.

                                    iii. And further condition that the court below shall

                       verify the criminal antecedent of the appellant and in case at any

                       stage it is found that the appellant have concealed his criminal

                       antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of

                       bail bond of the appellant. However, the acceptance of bail

                       bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be

                       delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

                                    7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and

                       this appeal stands allowed.



                                              (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
atul/-

U        T