Patna High Court

Dabir Alam @ DabirversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 2 April 2026
Disposal: REJECTED
Bench: RAJESH KUMAR VERMA

Holding

Bail was denied to the petitioner.

Summary

Petitioner Dabir Alam sought bail for offences under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the BNS, for which he had been in custody since 26 June 2025. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner confessed to the murder of his husband and that the post‑mortem report corroborated his confession, also noting his involvement in two prior cases. The petitioner contended that the FIR was fabricated and that only suspicion linked him to the crime, with no substantive material against him. The court examined the confession, the post‑mortem findings and the prosecution’s material, finding them sufficient to deny bail. Consequently, the petition for bail was refused.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in view of his alleged confession, post‑mortem report and prior criminal antecedents
Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute sufficient ground to justify continued detention

Legislation cited

BNS — s. 103(1), 238, 3(5)

Subjects

bail
confession
post‑mortem report
criminal procedure
BNS
sections 103, 238, 3(5)
suspicion
prior criminal antecedents

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10049 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2025 Thana- POTHIYA District- Kishanganj
                 ======================================================
                 Dabir Alam @ Dabir son of Samsuddin @ Samsul Haque R/v- Jhoragachh
                 Ps- Chopra Dist- Uttar Dinajpur W.B

                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                          ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   02-04-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since

                   26.06.2025 in connection with Pothia P.S. Case No. 167 of 2025

                   for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5)

                   of BNS.

                               3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 18.6.2025

                   at about 9.00 P.M. informant’s husband Md Hamidul went from

                   the house. When he did not return for long time she called him

                   on phone. Her husband stated that he has gone to meet the

                   petitioner but did not return to the house. Thereafter again she

                   tried to call her husband on mobile phone but her mobile phone

                   was switched off. She tried to search for her husband but could

                   not succeed. On. 21.6.2025 at about 10 p.m she got information
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10049 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
                                            2/3




          that motorcycle of her husband was lying near Golapanabara.

          On 22.6.2025 she got information that dead body of unknown

          person was lying at Jangal Basti. She went there and found dead

          body of her husband.

                      4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is

          further submitted that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is

          forged and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any

          offence as alleged in the FIR and petitioner has been made an

          accused in this case on the basis of suspicion and except

          suspicion, no other cogent material has come during

          investigation to suggest the involvement of petitioner in the

          present occurrence.

                      5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the

          State on the basis of materials available on record and the case

          diary has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the

          petitioner and submits that the petitioner was apprehended and

          he has confessed his guilt in the present occurrence and he has

          stated the manner of occurrence and that he along with other co-

          accused persons have committed the occurrence in question and

          the postmortem report also supports the confessional statement

          of the petitioner and apart from aforesaid, the petitioner has
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10049 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
                                                       3/3




                     antecedent of two cases other than the present case.

                                  6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

                     case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in

                     connection with Pothia P.S. Case No. 167 of 2025 pending in

                     the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Kishanganj.

                                  7. Prayer is refused.



                                            (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…