Patna High Court

Md. Souki AlamversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 17 June 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: RAJIV ROY

Holding

The anticipatory bail application was rejected.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Souki Alam, sought anticipatory bail in connection with a 2024 case alleging offences under several sections of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner and an associate fired at the informant, causing injury and attempting robbery. The petitioner contended that the allegations were exaggerated, the informant was a criminal, and the FIR was filed two days after the incident. The State opposed bail, arguing the FIR details supported the charges and the petition was filed after a delay. The court found the allegations sufficient to deny anticipatory bail, rejecting the application but directing that if the petitioner surrenders within four weeks, the matter will be taken up promptly.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under the alleged offences
Whether the delay in filing the FIR affects the grant of anticipatory bail
Whether the allegations in the FIR are sufficient to deny anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
B.N.S. — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 352

Subjects

anticipatory bail
FIR delay
Arms Act
criminal offences
bail denial
Bihar

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11188 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1001 Year-2024 Thana- ALAMGANJ District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Souki Alam Son of Md. Manzoor @ Md. Manzoor Khan RO - Mir
                 Shikarpur Toli, Nichli Sadak, P.S. - Alamganj, Dist. - Patna.
                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                          ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Rishinarayan Sinha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   17-06-2026                  Heard Mr. Rishinarayan Sinha, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned APP.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Alamganj P.S. Case No. 1001 of 2024 for the offence

                   registered under sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2), 352 and

                   3(5) of B.N.S. and Section 27 of Arms Act lodged on 10.11.2024

                   by the informant, Md. Mahfooz.

                                3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged

                   that Md. Shauki and Md. Sarfaraj (the petitioner herein) riding

                   motorcycle were rashly driving it. Upon objection, after abuse,

                   Md. Shauki opened fire causing injury on his leg. Further

                   allegation is that Md. Sarfaraj snatched the pistol from Md.

                   Shauki and once again fired which however hit the ground. Later

                   Md. Sarfaraj took out Rs. 5,000/- but as the locals arrived, they

                   left the place, this led to the FIR.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11188 of 2026(5) dt.17-06-2026
                                                      2/2




                    though there is allegation against this petitioner of opening fire

                    and injuring the informant, the same is an exaggerated one. The

                    fact remains that the informant himself is a criminal and the FIR

                    was lodged after two days inasmuch as the incident is of

                    08.11.2024 but the FIR was lodged on 10.11.2024.

                                 5. Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, on the other hand,

                    opposes the prayer submitting that the a perusal of the FIR would

                    show that on a minor issue, firstly, he called the associates, and

                    later, opened fire which hit the informant. The submission is that

                    the matter is of the year 2024 and he has moved before this Court

                    after much delay.

                                 6. Taking into account the submission of the parties as

                    also the allegation that has come against the petitioner, no relief

                    can be extended to him.

                                 7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected.

                                 8. If, however, the petitioner surrenders within four

                    weeks, the concerned Court shall take up the matter and dispose it

                    of preferably on the same day.



                                                   (Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/Sunny

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.