Patna High Court

Javed Alam @ Zabeed AlamversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 22 January 2026
Disposal: DISMISSED
Bench: SONI SHRIVASTAVA

Holding

The anticipatory bail was not cancelled; the application for cancellation was dismissed.

Summary

The petitioner, Javed Alam, sought the cancellation of anticipatory bail granted in 2016 to three co‑accused (Nos. 2‑4) in a criminal matter. He alleged that after the bail order the accused were involved in further altercations, leading to two later cases (Kochadhaman PS Case No. 31 of 2015 and No. 10 of 2017). The court observed that the 2015 case pre‑dated the bail order and the 2017 case was not a condition for bail cancellation, nor was the petition filed promptly (it was lodged in 2025 without a satisfactory explanation). Applying settled law that bail cancellation requires cogent and overwhelming circumstances, the judge found the petitioner's grounds insufficient and dismissed the application. Consequently, the anticipatory bail remained in force.

Issues considered

Can anticipatory bail be cancelled on the basis of subsequent criminal incidents not stipulated in the bail order?
Does an inordinate delay in filing a cancellation application bar relief?
Are the alleged subsequent altercations sufficient to constitute cogent and overwhelming circumstances for bail cancellation?

Subjects

anticipatory bail
cancellation of bail
delay in filing
subsequent offence
Criminal Procedure Code

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11144 of 2025
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2015 Thana- KOCHADHAMAN District- Kishanganj
                 ======================================================
                 Javed Alam @ Zabeed Alam S/o Late Badruddin @ Badrudeen R/o vill -
                 Phulwari, P.S.- Kochadhaman, Distt. - Kishanganj. ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.    Noorul Haque S/o Late Md. Tahir R/o vill - Fulwari, P.s. - Kochadhaman,
                 Distt.- Kishanganj
           3.    Md. Ashfaque Alam S/o Late Md. Tahir R/o vill - Fulwari, P.s. -
                 Kochadhaman, Distt.- Kishanganj
           4.     Hashim @ Md. Hasim S/o Manjar Alam @ Manzoor R/o vill - Fulwari, P.s.
                  - Kochadhaman, Distt.- Kishanganj
                                                               ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr. Dilip Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   22-01-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The present application has been preferred to cancel

                   the bail bonds of the opposite party nos.2 to 4, who were

                   granted the privilege of anticipatory bail vide order dated

                   29.03.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No.46918 of 2015 by a Bench of

                   this Court.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   pursuant to grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in the case in

                   question, the opposite party nos.2 to 4 have been indulging in

                   altercation due to which subsequent cases were also filed,

                   bearing Kochadhaman P.S. Case Nos.31 of 2015 and 10 of

                   2017. It is apparent from the face of record that while
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11144 of 2025(4) dt.22-01-2026
                                                        2/2




                      Kochadhaman P.S. Case Nos.31 of 2015, was instituted prior to

                      the grant of anticipatory bail in the present case. As far as

                      Kochadhaman P.S. Case Nos.10 of 2017 is concerned, the

                      prayer for cancellation of bail based only on a subsequent

                      incident of the year 2017, for which the petitioner filed a case

                      against opposite party nos.2 to 4, would not be a relevant

                      consideration for the purposes of such cancellation of bail

                      granted in the year 2016 for two reasons, firstly, it is not

                      mentioned in the order granting anticipatory bail to the

                      petitioner that filing of subsequent case against the opposite

                      party nos.2 to 4 would entail cancellation of bail granted to

                      them. Secondly, the present application for cancellation of bail

                      has been filed after inordinate delay in the year 2025, for which

                      no plausible and cogent reason has been assigned.

                                   4. In view of the foregoing reasons and also

                      considering the settled law with regard to cancellation of bail for

                      which cogent and overwhelming circumstances are necessary as

                      the parameters of grant of bail and cancellation of bail stand on

                      two different footing, I am not inclined to entertain this

                      application. Accordingly, it is dismissed.

                                                (Soni Shrivastava, J)
Trivedi/-
U       T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…